KQ What I can do is try to go inside the American bureaucracy and look out because the politics of oil is something that we in the US bureaucracy have really never understood. I learned about it more and more when I came here to Japan because you don't have oil here. South Korea has the same problem, We in the US do have oil, domestic as well as access to imports.
In the US, the priority is always in terms of power. We have rivalry between concerns about non-proliferation versus regional sensitivity. The US State Department and the National Security Council are designed to continuously compliment and clash over these issues. One reason for this is to restrain the influence of those officials who are in the so-called Chrysanthemum club," or pro-Japan club as they call it. They understand Japan's needs and priorities.
You have to do business and, to do business, you need to get oil. For oil, Japan needs to go to the Middle East. You cannot buy it all from where the US wants you to go and get it. On the other hand, the non-proliferation experts, like Mr. Bolton who is from Texas and is a lawyer, has absolutely no background but he is a friend of President Bush's presidential campaign money raiser James Baker, is reluctant to recognize the realities that Japan faces despite the fact that it is an ally. In the US government, the regional experts continuously clash with the non-proliferation experts. One very positive thing about Ambassador Galluchi was that, although a Republican and a non-proliferation expert, when he began the US-North Korea nuclear negotiations in 1993, he quickly realized that dealing with Asians is different than dealing with Europeans. He began to visit and to understand that the nations of East Asia have your own priorities. He learned to incorporate these into his thinking about how to deal with the North Koreans.
We are still going through a similar process now in the American bureaucracy. The so-called neo-conservatives of the Bush Administration are beginning to realize that there is reality beyond Texas. Clinton went through this too. He came to Washington as governor of Arkansas and his early priorities were gays in the military and the White House travel office. Meanwhile, diplomats down in Foggy Bottom, where the State Department is located, worried about nuclear war in Northeast Asia. Now, years later, along comes Bolton and Bush and what are their concerns? At first they were preoccupied with Texas, education and other domestic issues. It sounds cynical, but that was the immediate perception of this Bush Administration. Most of my friends in the bureaucracy, many of whom have now resigned, were so frustrated at the beginning of the Bush Administration. They thought, Oh no, here we go again." Just as with the Clinton Administration, once again they had to train a whole new group of people. This time, instead of Arkansas they were from Texas. If you look back, America has been ruled by governors ever since President Carter. The American bureaucracy has had to educate these people that Sacramento, Little Rock and Houston are not the center of the universe.
Please understand that, in Washington, we are still educating our government. You are lucky, you have people like Koizumi, they have traveled around the world. If you turn on television here, its fascinating to me. If you turn on the television in Washington, all you are going to hear about is that the traffic in Washington is bad or what Bush did yesterday. In Japan, you get Russian television, North Korean television, plus CNN. In Washington, we don't get the international version of CNN.
TT But it is also true isn't it that the Bush Administration has also had many seasoned veteran officials like Dick Cheney and Ramsfeld and behind the scene George Shultz has been very much instrumental in shaping Bush's Administration so I think you are exaggerating a little bit.
KQ Of course its possible. George Shultz I respect a great deal, I think he was an excellent Secretary of State. However, when you have Condoleezza Rice running the National Security Council, you do not have an assertive manager of the foreign policy team. This is because Bush is a very authoritarian manager. His style is action first, discussion later. Cheney is very confident and assertive. People who rank lower than Bush, Cheney, Ramsfeld have many more years of experience in government, but they prefer not to speak up. Nevertheless, Washington lacks a consistent, clear policy toward North Korea. This is because President Bush is apparently reluctant to pick between Ramsfeld's hard line" or Powell's moderate" line. Instead, us policy and strategy swing back and forth. This is not conducive to productive diplomacy.
TT Thank you very much.
KQ What I can do is try to go inside the American bureaucracy and look out because the politics of oil is something that we in the US bureaucracy have really never understood.