SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home Who Is Scott Gration?

THE PLANK MARCH 20, 2009

Who Is Scott Gration?

On Wednesday, Barack Obama appointed retired Air Force Major General J. Scott Gration as his special envoy to Sudan. In 2001, when the envoy position was first created, the job entailed brokering a peace deal between Khartoum and rebel groups in the south. It subsequently mutated to include halting Darfur's genocide and reversing President Bashir's expulsion of humanitarian aid workers. So, what does Gration's appointment mean for Darfur policy now?

The Sudan experts I spoke to were cautiously optimistic. Gration himself has usually been caricatured in the press as the ultimate Obamanaut--"the most mystic believer in Obama-ism" prone to "hero-worship." While serving as an attaché during Obama's trip to South Africa, Chad, and Kenya in 2006, he was taken by Obama's ability to speak transformatively about problems with tribal and nationalistic roots, and Gration has been an Obama adviser ever since. (Early in his senate career, Obama's foreign policy brain trust consisted almost entirely of Gration, Samantha Power, Richard Danzig, and Tony Lake.) Since the effectiveness of any special envoy depends wholly on access to the president--since it determines his ability to deliver on threats and promises flows--Gration's history with Obama may bode well.

Additionally, Gration has history with General James Jones, whose NSC has been asserting increased control over the foreign policy process. When Jones was running the United States European Command, Gration served as his plans and policy director--so it's hard not to see Gration's appointment as an assertion of the NSC's power over Sudan policy. Furthermore, the administration's biggest Darfur hawks--Gayle Smith of the ENOUGH project and Samantha Power--also work in the NSC.

Gration's military past is also a plus. While a senator, Obama derived significant street cred from Gration's martial gravitas. Now, Sudan experts tell me that Khartoum will respect the appointment of a military man--especially one like Gration, who ran Iraq's northern no-fly zone during the late 1990s--because President Bashir is himself a colonel and his government will see it as a signal of Obama's forcefulness.

But there are also a few reasons for Darfur interventionists to worry. Significantly, Gration originally had his heart set on running NASA. Obama tried to put him there until defense lobbyists scotched the idea. This raises questions about whether this new assignment is an afterthought for both Gration and the administration. If Obama sees the Darfur envoy simply as a patronage job for loyal supporters--like the multilateral affairs job that went to Power--then he may not be that ambitious about Darfur. That would certainly fit the widespread perception that Obama has so far been ineffectual about Sudan, only rushing to appoint Gration after an uproar from advocacy groups.

And Gration's diplomatic experience is thin--not a good thing for someone about to parachute into the middle of a diplomatic crisis with hundreds of thousands of lives at stake. (Most profiles of Gration emphasize that he knows about Africa by emphasizing how he was born in Congo and speaks Swahili--a language that is of course totally useless in Sudan.) Like previous envoys, it's likely he will spend nine months bringing himself up to speed on the issues; meanwhile, the U.S. will continue on its current blithe course, driven by entrenched players at the State Department.

Finally, Gration's personality and institutional mandate are only so important. Ultimately, it's policy that matters--and we have little idea what policy Gration himself would prefer. In October, he spoke about Darfur, Israel-Palestine, and Georgia to reporter Nick Lemann, telling him that: "We've got to fix the basic issues here. ... What doesn't work is forcing a solution. Create an environment, give people the opportunity to air their differences, and see if they can come together. We don't tell them what the solution is, but we do have an obligation--let's get people in here, find out the needs, see if you can come up with a plan. Don't try to freeze conflicts!" Not necessarily the germ of a coherent Sudan policy.

--Barron YoungSmith

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 8 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

8 comments

Seven paragraphs and the obvious still isn't stated: this is utter bull.  The point of this appointment is to postpone and dither -- yes, "ultimately it's policy that matters" but it's Obama's policy -- with four years of dealing with Darfur (remember all that palling around with Sam Brownback) and Samantha Power paraded around for anti-genocide cred, Obama didn't need a special envoy to set Darfur policy.  By the time this kabuki is done Sudan will make its concessions (the return of some or all NGO's), the genocide will continue to be a grand success and the Administration will declare victory and go home.  No wonder Israel is stockpiling to nuke the world -- if this is what "never again" means (remember, Darfur is the...one...and...only...genocide...declared...by...Congress...and...the..state...department...WHILE...ONGOING) that's probably their only longterm hope.

- Lymon1

March 20, 2009 at 11:33am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

(PS -- by "nuke the world" I mean "sufficient mutually assured destruction" not a proactive move.  Ahem).

- Lymon1

March 20, 2009 at 11:34am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Ok, I don't know what happened to the formatting of my post -- funky things happen when I use arrows and elipses here -- but since this thread seems dead (surprise) I'm not retyping it.  

- Lymon1

March 20, 2009 at 1:15pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

someone should give Bashir an exploding cigar.  This crisis would dissipate quickly if the ncp brutalcrats knew they'll simply get killed if they refuse play ball.

- Maxblum13

March 21, 2009 at 1:53am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

  More important (not to lymon) questions may be: 1a.) Is Obama using and choosing the special envoy status earlier and in more regions than other presidents and 1b.) Does this speak to more than his particular foreign policy goals?

  Of course I suspect State and Hillary will have more specialists this appears to be the case, at least at this point in their term. But this style of Obama inserting individuals into most disciplines (from economics, security, and various domestic policies) fits his style. He seeks and demands multiple opinions and it's clear he prefers not to rely on particular a cabinet secretary or staff person. Didn't Gates provide that profile on Meet The Press when he said the president requires people in a meeting declare their position? If not, Obama calls them out.

  This also means the influence of any single individual may be over rated, they are merely a conduit for more information. An example of this is Obama's unwillingness to hang the Treasury Sec. because Geitner was one of many voices just as Obama has Gates gathering information from a wide range of people (On Iraq, the coffins returning to Dover). The recent TNR story on the when and how of health care was also an exercise in seeking input from specialists along with the political wing.

 Sorry for the long and seeming off topic reply. I expect we'll be seeing so many people providing information that we may conclude any single person's impact will be necessarily diluted.

  In hindsight it wasn't worth the ink that Rev. Rick drew before the Inauguration. So whether it's policy or politics, we might not wish to make sweeping conclusions based on people or their positions. I don't expect Mitchell or Holbrooke to be place holders but a year from now we'll see a lot more people with titles and roles and Obama will be hearing from people and we won't know it. But they'll only be competing with others because this president doesn't delegate policy or the decisions to form a policy. Viable or not as POTUS, that's how he ran his campaign and that's how he'll govern.

- michael

March 21, 2009 at 11:33am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I hear you, michael, we'll just have to wait and see, though I'd say that the Obama group are awfully slow off their starting blocks when it comes to Darfur. Their bombast on the campaign trail has not yet been matched by their action. We'll see.

- scrubbyoak

March 21, 2009 at 1:35pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Maxblum13,

Hey, it worked with Yasir Arafat!

- ccarrick@vzavenue.net-old

March 22, 2009 at 10:07pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The Geithner Disaster: How The Treasury Secretary Is Undermining Obama's Entire Economic Agenda

- Anonymous

March 23, 2009 at 10:31am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close