By Dawn's Early Light

Japan takes India to the Dance

Following on the heels of a major meeting of President Wu of China and Prime Minister Singh of India, Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi has made an important visit to New Delhi.  Many suitors are vying for India's attention.  While China's trade with India has skyrocketed 79% in the past year to $14 billion, the US and Japan are offering many incentives to India.  Every major power wants to take India to the dance.

Asia Times has an editorial by Aruni Mukherjee "India beckons Land of the Rising Sun".  He argues:

"[Japan] has made a conscious effort to boost the poor infrastructure in India, to make it easier for its own companies to invest in the country. Already, India is Japan's largest overseas aid receiver, and on March 31 it announced another $1.3 billion as a "soft loan" for eight projects, varying from the Delhi Metro to building flyovers in Kolkata to irrigation projects in Rajasthan.

Although India-Japan joint ventures, such as Hero-Honda, Maruti-Suzuki and Toyota-Kirloskar, have been successful, actual inflow of direct investment from Japan to India is abysmally low.

While Delhi contemplates 'the mother of all free-trade agreements' with China, a far better option for an FTA is Japan."

Japan is in talks with India regarding military cooperation, a free trade zone and further "soft loan" development projects that total over $4 billion.  While these offers are available without India choosing to take Sec. Rice up on the US offer of defense assistance to India [See DEL here], the packages from both countries are quite complementary.  It is conceivable that this plan was a part of the US-Japanese Sec. of Defense and Sec. of State talks back in March [See DEL here].  The International Herald Tribune (owned by the NYTs) writes:

"Japan, a long-term U.S. ally, is also seen to be cooperating with Washington in a new initiative to build closer ties with India in response to China's growing influence."

India's long-term strategic interests are far more closely aligned with Tokyo's than Beijing's.  Mr. Mukherjee argues:

"In fact, where Chindia [China-India] falls short, Japindia [Japan-India] could work in politics. The two countries share similar democratic ideals and have similar aspirations in the world. Japan is a member of the Group of Four (G4), along with India, and they are actively backing one another's bid for a permanent membership of the United Nations Security Council. China is opposed to the inclusion of both."

Economics is always very important, but national security matters and long-term nationalistic interests and shared values are of greater strength than trade alone.  Japan's political, economic and military moves towards a greater partnership with India make sense for both nations.

It will also have the consequence of further constricting Chinese regional hegemonic aspirations, which is in India's, the US's and Japan's interests.

Internal India Probe Could Delay Defense Contracts

The Asia Times had an article yesterday concerning defense-related fraud in the previous regime of the government of India.  This has led Congress to call for an investigation.  India is in the process of spending $15 billion in modernization of its armed forces.  Any investigation could slow down the already lengthy process of defense procurement.

"Arms manufacturers from the US, Italy, France, Russia, South Africa and Israel, with active backing from their respective governments, are lining up to ink deals with India for the supply of military equipment ranging from fighter aircraft to submarines, jets, radars and more. However, New Delhi's latest move to ask the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to probe arms deals signed by the previous Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government during and after the 1999 Kargil border conflict with Pakistan may throw a further wrench into the process of arms purchasing, which is quite protracted in any case."

The defense scandal may affect purchase contracts with the French, Dutch and South Africans.

" One immediate casualty has been the further deferring of the purchase of French Scorpene submarines. The Indian navy was looking to ink the $3.2 billion deal finally, which has been under negotiation since 2002, until politics took over. The problem is made more acute by the fact that a part of India's existing fleet comprising Soviet Foxtrots and Kilo-class submarines are to be decommissioned in the next five years.

The CBI has also been asked to look into all contracts with Denel, a South African firm accused of paying kickbacks to influence a deal to sell anti-materiel rifles to the Indian army. The contract for supply of bunker-buster rifles was clinched with the previous BJP government two years ago and part of the arms shipments have already been made. Denel has denied any foul play and issued a statement saying that the deal went through the proper channels and was above board.

It can be recalled that the allegations of kickbacks from Sweden's Bofors firm to clinch the sale of 410 howitzers to the Indian army in 1986 in a deal worth $1.3 billion ultimately led to Rajiv Gandhi being ousted as prime minister. Though the Bofors guns played a key role in the Kargil conflict, the scandal created major delays in the purchase of modern weapons further on, with Defense Ministry bureaucrats and military officials chary of clearing arms purchases for apprehension of later allegations of bribery.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has already gone on record to say that the 'defense scandals' will impact the arms purchase. 'We have to make every effort to ensure that these recent events do not create a disincentive for taking timely decisions regarding armaments [purchases],' he said."

It will be interesting to see what effect, if any, this has on the possibility of a large US defense purchase by India.  Since the US offer is new and not associated with past corruption, it may now be a more palatable offer to the Indians and one that can move ahead faster than a French arms purchase.

Prior DEL posts on Indian defense purchases of US military hardware and of US-Indian foreign relations can be found here, here and here.

France and the EU Constitution

It will be interesting to see how the French vote on the European Union's constitution on May 29th.  Jacque Chirac has a long way to go if he wants to bring the French citizens with him and move the EU towards tighter integration.  As one of the leading members along with Germany, a "no" vote from the French would be crippling to other countries' passage of the document.

As this article from Charles Wyplosz in RealClearPolitics illustrates:

"Because all EU member countries must ratify the constitution, a French "Non" will, in effect, kill it...

Amazing as this turn of events seems, it has been long in the making. It is amazing because France is not just a founding member of the European Community, but also has been the main driving force behind all major steps toward 'ever closer union.' But French opposition was also predictable because, for over a decade now, France has veered away from Europe and now finds itself increasingly isolated. Of course, Europe has also moved away from France through successive enlargements, but the main roots of the estrangement lie in France itself."

Professor Wyplosz gives several good arguments why France and the other principal nations of the EU are diverging and they are not associated with the Iraq war.

"The French regard with great sadness their declining status and prestige - not only in world politics, but also in culture, science and, importantly, language. Europe, in their view, was always a way of reclaiming world influence.

For three decades, this worked. France and Germany had forged an alliance that called the shots in Europe. Not interested in geopolitical power - a legacy of its Nazi past - Germany was content to back France's ambitions as long as the Common Market allowed it to be Europe's economic powerhouse.

But that alliance is unraveling as Germany's own status declines, owing to its mediocre economic performance and the loss of its prestigious Deutschemark. Moreover, Germany is increasingly interested in exercising political influence on its own; as a result, it is no longer happy with what it gets from the alliance with France."

It must be difficult for the French citizens, with much more generous worker benefits than most of their EU counterparts, to accept a more integrated union when they have an unemployment rate of 10.1% for the general public and 22% for youth under 25, which is over double Britain's 4.8% overall unemployment rate and 12% for those under 25, according to the Economist.  France's economic engine with all of its socialist, lack-of-incentive-to-work structure is making further integration that much more of a challenge.  Mr. Chirac tried a debate before a youth audience to bridge the opinion poll divide and failed.  In the same Economist article, the appearance was summed up rightfully:

"Young job-seekers tend most often to be excluded—hence their anxiety. Asked on television last week why Britain's unemployment was so much lower, Mr Chirac replied that its social rules would be 'unacceptable' in France. In the Rue Damrémont, that falls flat: what is unacceptable is not being able to find a job."

Charlemagne in his regular Economist column (different from the above quoted article) has an excellent analysis of the political thinking behind salvaging the EU from a "no" vote.  Even with the countries stripping out key parts of the constitution and enacting them into law under their current rules, there could be major long-term structural problems.

"But it would ignore the new and unpredictable political mood that would surely follow from a French no. Fed up with the economic and political consequences of EU enlargement, France might be tempted to push for a radical reorganisation of the EU around the original six members. A country that is into its fifth republic would have no fear of a second EU. But the difficulty with French day-dreams of this sort is that, after a referendum failure, Mr Chirac would be too enfeebled politically to launch any such initiative. And the Germans, France's indispensable partners, might anyway be disinclined to follow him."

The EU draft constitution never had wide appeal.  The EU has long been more a dream of political leaders on the left than the average worker or pensioner.  The constitution was originally envisioned without a direct popular vote for some of its participants.

"Eurosceptics have long predicted that deeper integration based on shallow popular support would spark a backlash. And not just Eurosceptics. A year before the constitutional convention met, Frits Bolkestein, then a European commissioner, commented that 'it would be a risky business to work towards a federal Europe, since there is a good chance of failure and Europe might then end up on the road to disintegration as a kind of reaction.'"

A vote of no by the French, followed 3 days later by the Dutch, could set European dreams of integration back a decade or more.  It would also further increase America's long-term political and economic power while staving off further EU military integration, most likely, in the long run. Without a good deal of popular support behind the EU, it would be hard to rally its already struggling economies to move military spending to levels that are anywhere close to the US.

May 29th will be an important date.

India Moves Towards US?

Air India, the Indian state-owned airline, chose Boeing over Airbus for a $6.8 billion order of 50 Boeing aircraft, including eight 777-200, fifteen 777-300 and twenty-seven 787s.

This is significant because of the political signals it sends.  While I hope it is an indicator that supports the Dawn's Early Light paradigm that India will move towards the US in a new strategic partnership (see DEL here, here and here), it could be a placating move, much like the US move to sell 24 F-16s to Pakistan before offering India 126 F-16s.

Joe Katzman at Winds of Change believes that India will ultimately opt for French Mirage 2000 aircraft.  If this is correct, then India would be placating the US and keeping its options open by turning down Airbus after a strong French push in order to then purchase militarily from the French.  The AP piece points out the high stakes diplomacy of the US vs. French dueling Transportation Ministers:

"Earlier this month, Boeing's senior vice president of sales Dinesh Keskar said his company had offered "comprehensive and competitive bids" for the planes and last week, U.S. Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta visited New Delhi and said relations between the United States and India would benefit if Boeing gets the order.

The French government has been lobbying on behalf of Europe-based Airbus, and French Transportation Minister Gilles de Robien was in New Delhi on Monday to meet with India's aviation minister, Praful Patel.

Indian Airlines, the domestic counterpart of Air India, wants to buy 42 planes from Airbus and is waiting for government approval. Robien said he hoped Air India also would choose Airbus."

India, through its domestic Indian Airlines, could still award Airbus a nice contract as India continues its policy of playing all sides wisely to its advantage, but Airbus losing the international flight order to Boeing has to hurt, especially after a string of Airbus victories of late (though this Air Canada purchase is a double blow economically).

Dawn's Early Light, while allowing that this announcement could be a feint towards the US before aligning with France on the defense aircraft order for the IAF, is of the opinion that New Delhi is demonstrating signs of partnering with Sec. Rice in her bid of building a long-term strategic alliance to counter China. 

Mr. Katzman and I are both in agreement that India could turn down the US offer for F-16s over a French or Russian design and still opt for the US partnership.  However, I believe India pursuing this type of blatant self-interested style diplomacy would not cement the type of political, economic and military partnership from the United States that would be in both countries' long-term interests.

Update: Bruce Chang (of Between Worlds and Naruwan Formosa) emails:

"Bill, coming so closely on the heels of Raffarin's trip as this news does, I'd say you're right that there's something goin on there.  Of course, New Delhi may see things differently, but the announcements of the deals is primarily a PR war between France and the US.  I don't doubt that India will continue to purchase equipment wherever it can get it so long as the purchase makes sense.  With regard to commercial airliners, Boeing's offerings clearly make more sense than Airbus, particularly if one is watching one's budget.  With regard to military aircraft, however, I don't know that the US is particularly generous about the latest generation of F-16s.  Even Taiwan has some vintage Mirages, if I remember correctly.  Thus, if the US were selling latest-and-greatest fighters, and China wasn't a threat, they would probably be buying from us.  The French have no problems selling their fighters because they don't expect ever to have to fight China.

Of course, announcements like this always include some political posturing.  I think essentially what India is saying is that they're watching out for their own best interests, but that they like what the US does have to offer.  Remember, all that India has to do is be able to beat Pakistan, just in case."

Update 2: Nitin Pai of The Acorn emails his thoughts:

"Bill,

I just came across this news so my impressions are preliminary.

I think this deal has more to do with bilateral economic relationship rather than with security. That's because the US and India struck a 'open skies' deal just a few weeks ago, and this order is likely part of a tacit quid pro quo. Private Indian carriers can, for the first time, ply the (lucrative) India-US sector. That's a big boost for the Indian aviation sector, the Air India order is a nice thank you note. It has to be tacit, lest the Europeans complain.

As for the F-16s; I wonder if you have read this piece by Kaushik http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=796137&C=thisweek
He advocates that India should go slow on the US arms offer. I don't agree with his conclusions, but he makes some very good arguments."

Update 3: Welcome back Winds of Change Monday Wrap-Up.  For more from Dawn's Early Light on India click here ("Japan Takes India to the Dance" and "Internal India Probe Could Delay Defense Contracts"), for China click here and for Japan click here. (May 1, 2005)

Suggested Reading

I thought I would recommend to you some eclectic reading that you might enjoy:

• Bill Roggio has an excellent follow-up to his post of the downed Bulgarian helicopter in Iraq and how an Iraqi turned in one of the murders.
• Citizen Z has an interesting piece from The Economist on why homosapiens beat out neanderthals in the evolutionary chain: trade.
• Bruce at Naruwan Formosa has a revealing and horrifying look at China, its torture and persecution of Christians, the UN and NGOs. 
• Quillnews examines the "hush-hush" world of 527s and campaign finance reform, and the MSM's lack of coverage.
• Pastor Tod Bolsinger is back from his trip to Malawi and has some touching reflections.
• Okie on the LAM digs into the filibuster issue of judicial nominees.  However, are Sen. Frist and Sen. Reid heading for a bad compromise on allowing 2 of the 10 judges to move forward?  Attorney Hedgehog has the Republicans talking points memo of why the Democrats' filibuster is not democratic.
• Pastor John Gillmartin has some interesting thoughts on "why men hate church?" and how to improve it.
• Cheat Seeking Missiles has some thoughts on an LAT piece on what China has wrought by inflaming anti-Japanese sentiment via email and the internet.
• Eagle Speak comments on the very troubling NYT article today about the lack of armor and "lessons learned" training for units sent to Iraq.  Our government should not be sending units to Iraq that are not fully armored. 
• And finally, but by no means least, if you haven't read the witty Brain Droppings, check it out!

Enjoy.

UPDATE: WILLisms has a in depth look with cool graphs on PAC spending to Republicans and Democrats.  An Excellent read, and while you are there, check out this link.

A Brutal Murder in Iraq

Bill Roggio at the Fourth Rail has an excellent post I missed a couple of days ago on the execution by Islamic terrorists of the sole survivor of a helicopter crash caused by the same terrorists.

I have been quite a student of Mr. Mark Bowden's Black Hawk Down account of the Battle of Mogadishu, October 3-4, 1993 in Somalia.  Mr. Roggio ties in the training that Bin Laden and his thugs gave to Aidid's clansmen in Somalia to shoot down American helicopters to the training by the terrorists in Iraq.

The point-blank execution of the survivor was evil.  How anyone can believe that this is God's will is amazing.  This is not the God I believe in.

The US Moves Away from Free Trade with China

The Economist has as its lead story an article on the US moving politically and diplomatically against the Chinese over trade:

"America's Congress is taking a harsher line on trade, particularly with China. The Bush administration is also getting into the act, with the treasury secretary and even the newly nominated trade representative talking tough. Is America turning protectionist?"

America may be, and while economics on the surface may be driving it, the strategic dimensions play a potentially subtle, yet larger role. 

"The current bout of China-bashing is not a replay of the 1980s. Back then, large American firms, particularly the Detroit car giants, led the clamour for protection. Now big business, which relies heavily on Chinese inputs, is quieter. The shouting comes from smaller American suppliers. And even the noisier business groups, such as the National Association of Manufacturers, are relatively nuanced. Though the NAM wants Beijing to revalue the yuan, it does not support the Schumer bill.

Less encouragingly, the political and economic risks are bigger this time round. In the 1980s Japan, for all its faults, was always viewed as a democratic ally in Asia. By contrast, China is now seen as a nasty communist regime and a dangerous rival. In the mid-1980s, America's current-account deficit was smaller, 3.5% of GDP in 1985 compared with 6.3% today, and its debt stock lower. Today, America is the world's biggest debtor, with China as an important creditor. A sharp reversal in China's appetite for American Treasury bonds could send interest rates soaring."

I believe these events are coming together outside of the Bush Administration's strategic plans for India, but the timing is helpful.  If India plays its cards right, it can take advantage of an increasingly difficult relationship between the US and China.

Joint Chiefs of Staff - General Peter Pace

President Bush elevated today, pending expected Senate confirmation, Marine Corps General Peter Pace from Vice Chairman to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.  In the President's remarks he said of Gen. Pace:

"I'm confident that the great work that General Dick Myers set in motion at the Pentagon will continue under the leadership of General Pete Pace. The first thing America needs to know about Pete Pace is that he is a Marine. To the American people, "Marine" is shorthand for "can do." And I'm counting on Pete Pace to bring the Marine spirit to these new responsibilities.

Sempre Fi

This is a big moment not only for Gen. Pace but for all Marines.  This is the first Marine to be nominated for the position.  Given the tremendous amount of work, courage and dedication the Marine Corps has shown in Afghanistan and Iraq, he is a fitting individual for the task. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff was reorganized by the Goldwater-Nichols Act of 1986 that reformed the military and changed the position to have up to two consecutive two-year terms.  President Bush gives Gen. Pace's history:

"General Pete Pace's life is the story of the American Dream. His father was an immigrant from Italy. Pete Pace was born in Brooklyn. He grew up in New Jersey and he graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy. He was a rifle platoon leader in Vietnam; he commanded Marines in Somalia; and he went on to command U.S. Marine forces in the Atlantic, and became the head of the U.S. Southern Command. It tells you something about Pete Pace's devotion to his troops that under the glass on his desk at the Pentagon, he keeps a photo of Lance Corporal Guido Farinaro. He was the first Marine he lost in combat in Vietnam.

I've come to rely on Pete Pace's wisdom, judgment and sense of humor. I will continue to rely on those qualities as he serves our nation as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. We'll need his wisdom and determination as we continue to transform our Armed Forces, so we can defeat today's enemies, while preparing ourselves for military challenges we will face as this new century unfolds."

Gen. Pace has a large task to take on as the US military continues carrying out its mission at high tempo pace and looks to continue to transform itself under Sec. Rumsfeld.  Gen. Pace had this to say about the role:

"This is an incredible moment for me. It is both exhilarating and humbling. It's exhilarating because I have the opportunity, if confirmed by the Senate, to continue the serve this great nation. It's humbling because I know the challenges ahead are formidable. But I have great faith in our ability to meet those challenges -- for both personal and professional reasons."

He has an impressive military history that is diverse and makes him a qualified candidate.  Not only serving at Camp Pendleton, just south of San Clemente where I live, he has served in Latin America and Africa.  According to the NYT:

"General Pace is a graduate of the Naval Academy. Born in Brooklyn and reared in Teaneck, N.J., he led a rifle platoon during the Vietnam War. He is known in the Pentagon as "Perfect Pete," for his good looks and military bearing.

The general also served in Somalia during the ill-fated American intervention there in the early 1990's and commanded American troops in Latin America until he was tapped as vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs after the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001."

The Marriage Factor

What attributes do the men who have served our country in this role share in common?  I am no expert on their lives, nor do I have personal experience of sharing in their service to their country, but I do find it interesting that they seem to be of a different caliber than the average American.  Gen. Pace this Sunday will celebrate his 34th wedding anniversary with his wife Jennifer.  Current Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Myers has been married to his wife for over 40 years now as well.  The trend continues.  Former Chairman Colin Powell has been married to his wife Alma for 42 years, former JCSC Hugh Shelton for 42 years, and former JCSC John Shalikashvili for 38 years.

I think this dedication and commitment to their marriage and obviously having their spouses' support has played a tremendous role in their ability to attain and successfully execute their top military position.

Thanks to tdaxp for pointing out Gen. Pace's promotion.

A Personal Interview with Secretary Rice

While in Lithuania, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice sat down for an interview with Fox New's James Rosen.  While Sec. Rice is a private person, he did draw out some interesting information on the Secretary's personal views and personal beliefs.  Dawn's Early Light takes a look at some of the highlights:

Personal Reading Favorites

"QUESTION: What is the most influential book that you have ever read, excluding the Bible?

SECRETARY RICE: Excluding the Bible?

QUESTION: Yes.

SECRETARY RICE: Probably the most influential book for me was a biography that -- several biographies that I’ve read of the Founding Fathers. I’m a big fan of biography and that’s really what I read, and to me these biographies of the Founding Fathers show that though these were giants in terms of the development of institutions and foresightfullness really of what it would take to have a stable democracy for a long time, they were also imperfect people, and they were trying to find the best way forward at any given time. And I think that’s a really good lesson for all of us."

While no specific books are named, it is still a very telling answer.  Secretary Rice is interested in how the development of a stable democracy comes about.  This is a very macro level approach.  However, she adds about the "imperfect people" that are the architects of a successful system.  It is telling on two levels, the first being its direct application to Iraq, Afghanistan and other transitional states moving towards democracy, and on a second level that individual principal actors (the micro) can make an impact on foreign affairs. 

On Music

"QUESTION: What album have you listened to more times than any other album?

SECRETARY RICE: I’ve probably listened to the Brahms’s F Minor Piano Quintet (courtesy Amazon.com) more than anything else because it’s something I’ve struggled to learn, and I tend to, when I’m learning a piece, to listen to other versions of it to get ideas. And it’s probably my favorite piece in the world."

This is truly interesting.  Dr. Rice was a classically trained pianist prior to her move into studying international relations.  DEL knows nothing of music but did find some fascinating information on Johannes Brahms (1833-1897) from music blogger, Dr. Dick Strawser.  The piece Dr. Rice references was originally composed by Brahms for two pianos to play.  Brahms was a man who never married, and the woman he loved married someone else.  While not wanting to read into Brahms' life story and Dr. Rice's admiration for his work, it is fascinating the parallels they share:  extremely gifted, fast risers in their respective fields, and neither ever married.

On People She Admires from the Civil Rights Movement

"QUESTION: In your office I saw prominently displayed a copy of -- an aging paperback copy of Malcolm X Speaks.

SECRETARY RICE: Mm-hmm.

QUESTION: Do you admire Malcolm X?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, I think certainly he was a critically important historical figure. I don’t admire some of the things that he stood for, but as an historical figure at that particular point in Black history, he was an important man.

QUESTION: How so?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, because there was, at the time, a struggle in the Black community to better understand what we were going through in the ‘60s, how to do it. Obviously, I, myself, believe that the decision not to use violence was the right decision. But there was a kind of need for pride in a Black community that had been systematically denied any sense of pride.

QUESTION: Wouldn’t you look, maybe, to a different figure, like Mohammed Ali, for that?

SECRETARY RICE: I looked to Martin Luther King, of course, for that. I looked to people like Dr. Dorothy Height for that sense of pride. I looked to my own parents and my own grandparents, who maintained an extraordinary sense of pride. And they did it not rejecting America but really accepting the ground rules of what it meant and took to get ahead in the United States. And that’s probably why, even though Malcolm X was a great historical figure, an important historical figure, he was not particularly a figure that I would have admired."

The exchange on Malcolm X is interesting, and her answer about his significance and importance to the civil rights movement is telling as well.  However, she does not admire several of the violent aspects that Malcolm X espoused.  Mr. Rosen attempts to lead her to Mohammed Ali as a black figure to be respected and who embodies pride.  Secretary Rice is quick in replying her respect for a Christian and leader of the civil rights movement, Martin Luther King, Jr., rather than the Muslim boxer Ali.  While this is only speculation, I imagine that Dr. Rice could relate to MLK.  She respected greatly her father, who was a Methodist minister, much like Dr. King, who was a Baptist pastor. 

On Marriage, Work and Faith (Destiny)

"QUESTION: Final question. And this is somewhat personal in nature. I know you don’t like to talk about yourself.

SECRETARY RICE: No, I don’t.

QUESTION: So that’s why I’m doing it (laughter). But many people would look at you, either if they know you well or perhaps especially if they don’t know you well, and they would say: “Here is a woman who has achieved extraordinary status and power. Here, too, is a woman who never married and who will remain childless.” And they might be tempted to look at those two situations and draw a causal connection or at least say -- infer that that reflects your priorities, per se. Is that a fair inference to draw?

SECRETARY RICE: No, I’ve never understood this juxtaposition. My view is that you don’t get married in the abstract, you actually would like to marry someone. And since that’s never come along for me, it's not the rejection of marriage, I don't think that I've been too busy doing other things.  I don't see these as choices somehow. I see them as the way life has unfolded.

And I do think that sometimes there's a misunderstanding that if you did not marry, that you somehow do not have a life.  I've read that, you know, about myself from time to time: "Well, it must be all work."  I have great friends and family and hobbies and avocations and many, many things that I love doing.  I have a tremendously full life and I think that's true for a lot of people who chose-who did not marry.

QUESTION: So you think that had you chosen-or had not chosen- you think that had you been married and been raising kids, you still possibly could have achieved the-- the power and the status that you have?

SECRETARY RICE: I really don't know how you can make a post hoc determination of something like that.  Life has unfolded the way life has unfolded.  And probably because I'm also a deeply religious person, I believe it's unfolded as it should have.  And I'm awfully glad that it's unfolded this particular way."

One can see, in her answer to this question, why she and President Bush can be often of one mind in seeing problems.  Both tend to the concrete and are uninterested in abstract arguments that do not affect the here and now.  Both are guided by their faith.  As Sec. Rice says, "I'm also a deeply religious person.  I believe it's unfolded as it should have."  She is content, as well she should be, with the success she has attained.  She does not see marriage and children versus work and achievement as conflicting or even a part of the same debate. 

Whether she plans on running for the White House or other political office, Secretary Rice is an extremely admirable person with an amazing history and an exceptionally bright future. 

Puppy Nikon Photo Blogging

My wife and I have two English bulldogs that are a little over a year old named Clementine and Sydney.  I thought I would share with you several pictures of them.  All but the pool photo was taken with the Nikon D70.

Enjoy.