http://bechamilton.com/?p=1386 Investigating the past 6 years of Darfur policy and citizen advocacy Wed, 01 Sep 2010 10:41:24 +0000 hourly 1 http://bechamilton.com/?p=1386&cpage=1#comment-1645 Time for a truce between Gration & the activists? Tue, 20 Oct 2009 17:46:53 +0000 http://bechamilton.com/?p=1386#comment-1645 [...] announced today is what Gration himself has been talking about from the beginning with those “stop-go” charts . Of course he has undercut himself a painful number of times, and spoken to the media in ways [...] [...] announced today is what Gration himself has been talking about from the beginning with those “stop-go” charts . Of course he has undercut himself a painful number of times, and spoken to the media in ways [...]

]]> http://bechamilton.com/?p=1386&cpage=1#comment-1487 Bec Hamilton Thu, 01 Oct 2009 11:59:39 +0000 http://bechamilton.com/?p=1386#comment-1487 I wouldn't call him a free agent - he has a few red lines set out for him, like he knows the Administration position on the arrest warrant means he can't meet with Bashir. But beyond a few red lines there remains genuine disagreement on what Sudan policy should be, and instead of the Administration having come out with a strategy and said - here everyone, this is what the position is - they have stalled. In the interim, Gration has been the only public face for people to look at for clues as to what the Sudan policy might eventually be. And rather than sit and twiddle his thumbs while the review was ongoing, he decided to get stuck in. But it means he's been operating in a vacuum, in the sense that anything he says we all jump on and wonder - is Administration-endorsed policy? Generally it's not, but not (in my view) because Gration is actively going against the official policy, but simply because no uncontested version of official policy has been laid out. I wouldn’t call him a free agent – he has a few red lines set out for him, like he knows the Administration position on the arrest warrant means he can’t meet with Bashir. But beyond a few red lines there remains genuine disagreement on what Sudan policy should be, and instead of the Administration having come out with a strategy and said – here everyone, this is what the position is – they have stalled. In the interim, Gration has been the only public face for people to look at for clues as to what the Sudan policy might eventually be. And rather than sit and twiddle his thumbs while the review was ongoing, he decided to get stuck in. But it means he’s been operating in a vacuum, in the sense that anything he says we all jump on and wonder – is Administration-endorsed policy? Generally it’s not, but not (in my view) because Gration is actively going against the official policy, but simply because no uncontested version of official policy has been laid out.

]]> http://bechamilton.com/?p=1386&cpage=1#comment-1481 Alex Thurston Wed, 30 Sep 2009 19:22:49 +0000 http://bechamilton.com/?p=1386#comment-1481 Ok. So does that make him sort of a free agent? And does that imply that policy is partly being made on the fly - and partly by Gration himself? Ok. So does that make him sort of a free agent? And does that imply that policy is partly being made on the fly – and partly by Gration himself?

]]> http://bechamilton.com/?p=1386&cpage=1#comment-1479 Bec Hamilton Wed, 30 Sep 2009 16:12:17 +0000 http://bechamilton.com/?p=1386#comment-1479 You know, it would be lovely to think you are right, but I'm just not convinced there is that level of strategic coordination going on between Gration and the White House. You know, it would be lovely to think you are right, but I’m just not convinced there is that level of strategic coordination going on between Gration and the White House.

]]> http://bechamilton.com/?p=1386&cpage=1#comment-1478 Alex Thurston Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:44:50 +0000 http://bechamilton.com/?p=1386#comment-1478 It seems the administration has a pattern of floating trial balloons to see what the public reaction is before they make a move. Is it possible that Gration will sometimes hint at a policy the White House is considering, and then depending on public reaction they either walk it back or go forward with it? In other words, does the administration give Gration license to go further than Obama would in talking about normalizing relations with Khartoum, just to test the waters? It seems the administration has a pattern of floating trial balloons to see what the public reaction is before they make a move. Is it possible that Gration will sometimes hint at a policy the White House is considering, and then depending on public reaction they either walk it back or go forward with it? In other words, does the administration give Gration license to go further than Obama would in talking about normalizing relations with Khartoum, just to test the waters?

]]>