Betting on the new American vice-president

While the world debates who will be the next president of the United States, Washington insiders are talking about who will be the next vice-president, or as Americans call him, or her, the Veep.

Last month, Aaron Miller, one of President Bill Clinton’s former aides visited me at my office in the Embassy. I thought it would only be a courtesy visit to present me with his new book, “The Much Too Promised Land: America’s Elusive Search for Arab-Israeli Peace.” However, the conversation with him was so startlingly candid and insightful that I thought I should convey it to my readers.

What made me respect his honesty was his admission that while he and his colleagues, Dennis Ross and Martin Indyk, among other Jewish American officials, were serving as aides and assistants to US presidents, working on brokering peace between the Arabs and the Israelis, they also acted as Israel’s advocates, and put Israel’s interests above anything else, including the national interest of the country they were supposed to be serving. He told me literally: “We were actually acting as Israel’s attorney, catering and coordinating with the Israelis at the expense of successful peace negotiations. If the United States wants to be an honest and effective broker on the Arab-Israeli issue, than surely it can have only one client: the pursuit of a solution that meets the needs and requirements of both sides.”

Then he proceeded: “If either Obama or McCain would ask for my advice about who to pick for their team on the Middle East, I will not hesitate to tell them: whoever you may elect to choose, but be sure not to include anyone who worked previously with president Clinton, including myself.” I found this statement extraordinary.

Here is what Aaron Miller had previously written in the Washington Post: “With the best of motives and intentions, we listened to and followed Israel’s lead without critically examining what that would mean for our own interests, for those on the Arab side and for the overall success of the negotiations. The ‘no surprises’ policy, under which we had to run everything by Israel first, stripped our policy of the independence and flexibility required for serious peacemaking. If we couldn’t put proposals on the table without checking with the Israelis first, and refused to push back when they said no, how effective could our mediation be? Far too often, our departure point was not what was needed to reach an agreement acceptable to both sides but what would pass with only one -- Israel.”

On choosing the Veep
The hot talk in Washington today is mainly speculation on who would be McCain and Obama’s running mates. While 60 million Americans have just finished picking the two presidential candidates in a campaign that has cost hundreds of millions of dollars and fascinated the whole world, when it comes to choosing the vice-presidential candidate, or as the Americans would put it, the Veep, it is only Obama and McCain that decide.

The politically correct qualification for the Veep is the readiness to immediately presume presidential powers if any circumstances require it. So, in absence of any solid indicators on who will be actually chosen, I thought it might be useful to look for the criteria adopted by previous presidential candidates when looking for their running mate.

When the candidates wanted to present a balanced and all-encompassing tickets, they look for Veeps that would complement them. John Kennedy, a liberal from Massachusetts in the north, picked Lyndon Johnson, a conservative from Texas in the south. If this rule is to be followed, then my guess is that Obama will pick Senator Jim Webb from Virginia, while McCain will pick his former rival Mitt Romney, who has a strong popular base in Massachusetts and Michigan.

When the candidates wanted to compensate for their perceived weaknesses and vulnerabilities, they look for Veeps that would offer the qualities they lack. This was George Bush’s motive for selecting Dick Cheney, a veteran Washingtonian politician and insider. If this is the case, then my guess is that Obama will pick look for someone who is older than him and has formidable national-security credentials like Senator Joseph Biden. McCain, in this case, will again pick Mitt Romney, who is known for his executive experience and sound economic policies, as well as his relative youth.

However, some candidates opted to do the opposite: to consolidate their image and what they represent by picking a running mate very similar in characteristics and political orientations to themselves. This was what Bill Clinton did when he chose Al Gore. If Obama were to make a similar decision, his running mate would also be young, charismatic and outspoken, like the Kansas governor Kathleen Sibelius, while McCain would look for an old maverick like Senator Joe Liberman.

If the candidate is looking for party unity and consensus, then usually he selects his rival who lost to him during the primaries, particularly if the runner-up had lost by a small margin. That’s what Ronald Reagan did with George W.H. Bush, and John Kerry did with John Edwards. On this basis, Obama will most likely ask Hillary Clinton to join his ticket, while, for the third time, I believe McCain will invite Mitt Romney.
Whoever will be chosen to run alongside Obama and McCain will play a crucial role in making or breaking his or her presidential candidate. This is why it is a very serious decision that neither candidate can take lightly at this stage of the game, with both running neck-to-neck among the people.