Rice's Spanner in US Diplomatic Works

Indyk said the US stance would give the perception that Washington, through its backing to Israel, was responsible for the civilian deaths in Lebanon.

"The public rewards of Rice's hard work may have been undone in the space of one hour of Rome," the Times commented.

Meeting in Rome on Wednesday, July 26, fifteen countries and international bodies failed to agree calls for an immediate ceasefire of the Israeli onslaught on Lebanon over the US opposition.

During the Rome meeting, Washington's top diplomat resisted calls for an immediate ceasefire in Lebanon, arguing that any "sustainable" Lebanon ceasefire should include political elements rather than an immediate ceasefire.

This has caused Rice to be isolated in one corner, refusing to yield to impassioned calls for an immediate halt of hostilities to end mounting civilian casualties in Lebanon.

"Everybody else took a free moral ride while she (Rice) took the blame," Martin S. Indyk, the former US ambassador to Israel, told the Times.

At least 600 Lebanese people, mostly children and civilians, have been killed and thousands wounded since Israel launched its 17-day onslaught after Hizbullah had taken prisoner two of its soldiers.

The hard-won infrastructure of the Arab country has been left in ruins, with Israel knocking out Beirut international airport, bombing ports, destroying bridges, setting power stations ablaze and reducing houses to rubble.

Buying Time

Rice, while drawing the final communiqué of the Rome meeting, came down to an almost one-hour fight over the wording of one passage in a bid to buy Israel more time to continue its Lebanon offensive, the Times said.

While other countries were pushing for a statement saying the group would work toward an "immediate ceasefire," Rice insisted on "work immediately" toward a ceasefire.

"That wording may be a small point to most people, but it is a huge one diplomatically since it shifts the burden away from an immediate cessation of violence and more toward diplomacy, a shift that also buys Israel more time to keep up its campaign," the paper said.

Indyk said the US stance would give the perception that Washington, through its backing to Israel, was responsible for the civilian deaths in Lebanon.

He blamed the Bush administration for handling the Lebanon crisis from the very beginning.

"President Bush, early in the crisis, should have sent an envoy to Arab capitals — even Syria’s — to show that the United States was trying to broker a ceasefire, even as it worked on the diplomatic package being constructed by Rice," he added.

State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said Friday that the suggestion that the Rome conference on the Middle East gave Israel the green light to pursue its offensive in Lebanon is "outrageous."

"Any such statement is outrageous," said Friday when asked about reports quoting Israeli Justice Minister Haim Ramon as saying the Rome meeting earlier this week gave Israel approval.

"The United States is sparing no efforts to bring a durable and lasting end to this conflict," Ereli told reporters.

Rice created seismic waves across the Arab world when she said that the Israeli-Hizbullah conflict was paving the way for a "new Middle East" with many analysts and former diplomats wondering what kind of Middle East that could emerge from such shocking scenes and massive destruction caused by Israel.

A December Gallup poll, conducted in 10 nations that comprise 80 percent of the world's Muslim population, found that an overwhelming majority of Muslims strongly doubted the United States was trying to establish democracy in the Middle East.

Oil, protecting Israel and dominating the region were seen as US goals, according to the survey.