.
(Haaretz) – Dennis Ross, who most recently served as a special State Department envoy to Iran, will abruptly be relieved of his duties, sources in Washington told Haaretz. An official announcement is expected in the coming days.
The Obama administration will announce that Ross has been reassigned to another position in the White House. In his new post, the former Mideast peace envoy under President Bill Clinton will deal primarily with regional issues related to the peace process.
Washington insiders speculate that a number of reasons moved the administration to reassign Ross. One possibility is Iran’s persistent refusal to accept Ross as a U.S. emissary given the diplomat’s Jewish background as well as his purported pro-Israel leanings. Ross is known to maintain contacts with numerous senior officials in Israel’s defense establishment and the Israeli government.
Diplomatic sources in Jerusalem surmised that another possibility for Ross’ ouster is his just-released book, “Myths, Illusions, and Peace – Finding a New Direction for America in the Middle East.” Ross and co-author Mokovsky also raised the possibility of military action against Iran.
Obama plays chess.
He is brilliant.
I said I would give him 6 months, he has surpassed what I thought he could do so quickly.
Obama effectively muzzled Ross for six months. And what kind of a jerk would Ross look like it he quit.
I see that Ross’s partner in that book, is now all over Fox, I think it was, pushing their book.
Meanwhile, Rahm is making the ultimate sacrifice. His family probably under horrendous pressure has failed to join him in Washington. That man has my support to.
Sorry, but I don’t see what is so brilliant about appointing Dennis Ross, given his lack of knowledge, his record, and his inclinations, to advise anyone about Iraq, and I don’t see anything brilliant in letting him anywhere near the “peace process” in any capacity.
The reasons are simple: the Clinton era subterfuge during the Barak-Arafat negotiations. Ross pretty much is a Tel Aviv politician, and Israel operative, in the US government, and if Obama is going to bring peace to the Middle East, Ross must go.
Just a suspicion here, but I suspect Ross was still trying to encourage the US to attack Iran for Israel’s sake. No evidence, just a suspicion. Time to go.
That’s what his book says.
l don’t think, as mattes suggests above, that this move was part of the chess game that many want to assume he’s playing.
l would posit, that given the current chaos in iran, and the continuing recalcitrance of israel, that obama’s back-tracking on this one as fast as he can. appointing ross was a huge mistake to begin with, and was one of those appointments that really got a WTF?! from my vantage point.
just take a look at his history and his connections…he’s a PNAC signatory for christsakes…and the linked source doesn’t even mention the fact that he co-founded AIPAC’s Washington Institute for Near East Studies.
maybe, finally, obama’s beginning to se that his embrace of bipartisanship is not being reciprocated.
ross had/has no business in an an administration that purports to be serious about resolving the l/P question, and reducing ME tensions overall.
good riddance.
I’m more than a little skeptical about the idea of Obama-as-chessmaster meme that keeps floating around. He is definitely subtle, especially by way of comparison to his predecessor, though I’ve got a 12-gauge shotgun that’s subtle compared to that guy.
The problem with the theory is that it’s basically unfalsifiable. If Obama does something that seems really stupid, and then backs away from it later, it’s assumed that it was part of some fiendishly clever gambit when it could equally well have been a fuckup that he simply recognized and corrected. If, on the other hand, Obama does something seemingly minor that turns out to pay off in a big way, it’s assumed that he planned it that way when it could just be that he got lucky. And by keeping his mouth shut most of the time, he just encourages the speculation.
Barack Obama is a pretty smart guy, but he just, well, a pretty smart guy. Gandalf the Grey he is not.
Dennis Ross was the “middle east” Clinton “expert”. I am sure Hilary pushed big time for Ross….plus Ross was coming out with his Let’s Bomb Iran Now book.
Obama gave him a chance to follow new policies….he did not, now he will be pushed aside.
Obama played it right.
interesting question – I’m sort of in the Obama as chessmaster camp because a) the way his campaign went; b) appointing Hillary. On the other hand aiting to see how the DOMA “debacle” plays out as well as torture prosecutions, and health care. whatever, there’s interesting timing in the Dennis Ross reassignment, kind of functions as a response to events in Iran saying we’re serious about dialog.
aiting = waiting
Yes, but what does it say that he will be working in some capacity connected with the “peace process”?
guess it depends what the details of his assignment turn out to be – is he being handled, or will he have real tasks, and if so, what tasks.
maybe Obama isn’t Gandalf the Grey, maybe he’s Elrond?
It is deeply doubtful that Iran’s refusal to accept Dennis Ross is due to his Jewish background. In fact, the suggestion is offensive. There is absolutely no doubt that they object strongly to his obvious loyalty to the most odious ideas of right wing Zionism. No one in his right mind would think that someone with his inclinations could ever be appropriate to have any connection to Iran unless the objectives toward Iran were 100% negative. Which, of course, invites the following question regarding Obama’s choosing him in the first place: “WTF???!!!!!!!!“
I wonder who Obama has in mind to replace him. Now HERE’s a radical idea! How about someone who actually – you know – knows something real about Iran? Even MORE radical, how about someone who has not openly demonstrated clear hostile intent toward Iran?
“In his new post, the former Mideast peace envoy under President Bill Clinton will deal primarily with regional issues related to the peace process.“
Given his ideology and his views, not to mention his performance as “peace envoy” (gag!) during the Clinton negotiations where for all practical purposes he acted as Israel’s lawyer, it is difficult to imagine why he should be allowed on the same planet with the region, let alone the “peace process”.
I’d be tempted to suggest Juan Cole, myself. But if his nomination must be approved by Congress, it’s probably doomed: The Republicans are holding up a whole bunch of Obama appointments.
Juan Cole is very knowledgeable on Iran, does some good analysis on it, and he actually is fluent in Persian, so he’s not qualified at all when it comes to Iran.
He is even better on Pakistan, where he lived for some years, so he is absolutely not qualified there.
He really does not understand Iraq at all, his analysis has generally been poor to terrible, starting with supporting the invasion because “it would be good for the Shi’ites”. And this is despite actually having lots of good information – he just doesn’t know how to interpret it. Of course, he has never even set foot in the country. Therefore, he quickly became an “Iraq expert” known to one and all. Of course, he IS fluent in Arabic, which is a mark against him for sure.
The rule is that the more you know about a place the less likely the government is to pick you as their adviser on it.