READER RESPONSE ON NATO AND SCHEDULING

In response to this post, reader Jeff Hart writes:

I disagree with your position on President Bush attending his daughters' graduation ceremony instead of a NATO meeting. I'm sure the graduation ceremonies have been on the President's calendar since his daughters headed off to college so it was basically poor planning on the part of the Turks to set up the conflict in the first place.

As you point out, this is a regularly occuring NATO meeting, not a crisis meeting. It will have little practical impact on NATO operations whether the President is there or not. On the other hand, his daughters will definitey notice if Dad isn't at graduation because he's off doing photo-ops with Eurocrats and they will still be his daughters in 2005 or 2009 when he leaves office. If anything, I suspect this will give President Bush a bounce domestically as it shows a man who is willing (and able) to place a high priority on his family relationships and major life events.

Assuming that what’s reported here is true, the original story seemed to indicate that the President’s staff made the original mistake here and didn’t pencil in the graduation ceremonies, so I’m not sure that it’s fair to blame the Turks. Be that as it may, though, in light of the recent bombings in Turkey, perhaps the President should revisit this issue and show support for our embattled ally. Even though it’s “only” a routine NATO meeting, the symbolic effect of a President's wreaking havoc on the schedules of other countries for personal reasons is quite stunning, I think. In addition, for those who are really concerned about the war on terrorism (as I am), the lack of domestic political fallout is probably not the correct standard for evaluating whether or not a presidential action is good or bad.