NY Times: Cutting James Baker's Ties (Mentions Carlyle Group, conflicts)

[La_Serpiente]

Last week, the White House summoned James Baker III, the Bush family's persuader of last resort, back to public service. His new portfolio is the diplomatically ticklish and economically crucial problem of restructuring Iraq's currently unpayable official debts. As a former secretary of both the State and Treasury Departments and a public and private Middle East deal maker, he is in many ways a supremely qualified choice. Yet as it stands right now, Mr. Baker is far too tangled in a matrix of lucrative private business relationships that leave him looking like a potentially interested party in any debt-restructuring formula. The obvious solution is for him to sever his ties to all firms doing work directly or indirectly related to Iraq.

Mr. Baker is senior counselor to the Carlyle Group, a global investment company that has done business with the Saudi royal family. He is also a partner in Baker Botts, a Houston law firm whose client list includes Halliburton. Baker Botts has an office in Riyadh and a strategic alliance with another firm in the United Arab Emirates, and it deploys Mr. Baker's name and past government service on its Web site to solicit Middle East business. It is inappropriate for Mr. Baker to remain attached to these businesses, whose clients and potential future clients could be affected by the decisions made about Iraq's official debt.

Iraq's overall debt is estimated at something over $100 billion, with another $100 billion or so owed in reparations. Just servicing that debt, without paying back any principal, looks beyond the means of a country whose oil revenues amounted to only $13 billion in the last full year before the war.

Finding a way to persuade creditor nations like France, Russia and the Persian Gulf Arab states to forgive part of Iraq's debt and restructure the rest is critical to the administration's foreign policy. It is no wonder the president turned to an experienced hand like Mr. Baker, whose legal maneuvering in Florida did so much to secure his hold on the White House in 2000. Yet before any of this can happen, Mr. Baker must show that he will be free of any private business entanglements that could raise legitimate questions about his recommendations. If the administration needs a political reason for doing the right thing, it need only look at the deep suspicion raised about the Iraqi construction contracts doled out to Halliburton, a company that was run by Dick Cheney before he became vice president.

more...

Cutting James Baker's Ties

[izzie]

1. Yar right but I think Bush will do as he wishes.

He seems to see no evil in anyone that lies or steals only sex is a sin or not doing as he orders. Leo Struss is alike and well.

[teryang]

2. Baker obviously has no ethics

...he ought to be disbarred.

This posturing over Iraqi debts is absurd. One day a sovereign regime over there will emerge (probably after a bloody civil war). American interests will be summarily ejected and all debts of whatever nature will be repudiated. Those non American companies who wish to do business with Iraq will have to negotiate on a level playing field. Namely, one from which the American military junta is excluded.

[donhakman]

3. He gave Saudi Arabia $26 billion

The Soveriegn debt of Iraq is supposed to be settled by the Sovergien ie. King, Pasha etc.

King Baker will not give up the Carlyle group except on paper.
The Carlyle Group's largest investors are George Bush Sr. and the bin Laden family of Saudi Arabia.

[0007]

4. James Baker doesn't play on a level playing field -

James Baker is a crook of the highest order.

[Martin Eden]

5. Baker is supremely UN-qualified for this job...

...not because he lacks knowledge or skill, but because of the conflicts of interest inherent in his business and law firm associations.

The Times editorial suggests that if he severs these ties, he is a good choice.

Nonsense!

It is naive to think that such ties, once severed, will not be reconnected when all is said and done. How many government officials (especially Republicans) get lucrative deals after their government service in the private sectors they helped while in office?

James Baker will continue to be an agent for Carlisle and Baker-Botts even if he "severs" those ties to avoid the appearance of conflict of interest for this debt restructuring.

He is a tiger for the lootocracy and is not about to change his stripes.

His connections should automatically DIS-qualify him for this assignment.

[burythehatchet]

6. I couldn't agree more

[HootieMcBoob]

7. baker botts and saudi royal family vs. family of 9-11 victims

I wish someone in the news would say something about Baker-Botts defending the Saudi Royal family against a suite brought against them by the family's of the victims of 9/11. I don't think the average american would think too kindly of that. But it just goes under the radar.

[littlejoe]

8. I enjoyed your analysis

and I think we both know that he won't sever his ties. It is only because of those ties that he is on this mission, in the first place. He will rationalize, as they all do, his conflict of interest. It was only less than two months ago that Dick Cheney asserted in an interview that he had no monetary connection to Halliburton. Yet it was discovered that he is still receiving a salary, much more than his V.P. salary. When confronted with this information, a spokesman for Cheney explained that technically there is no monetary tie, since the money is put in escrow.