One of my early glossy mag assignments was for the late Clay Felker just as his Manhattan, Inc. was morphing into the relatively short-lived M Inc. The story studied the Washington power game of leaks--trial balloon leaks, manipulation leaks, vindictive leaks, strategic leaks, leak leaks. It came to mind today after many, many years on reading this story in Haaretz:
A senior adviser to Barack Obama on Sunday denied reports that the U.S. president-elect plans to throw his weight behind the 2002 Arab peace plan, which calls for Israel to withdraw from all territories captured during the 1967 Six-Day War in exchange for normalized ties with the Arab world.
This particular "senior adviser" is named and quoted as Dennis Ross, who is "denying reports" first published yesterday in the Times of London saying:
Barack Obama is to pursue an ambitious peace plan in the Middle East involving the recognition of Israel by the Arab world in exchange for its withdrawal to pre-1967 borders, according to sources close to America’s president-elect. ...
On a visit to the Middle East last July, the president-elect said privately it would be “crazy” for Israel to refuse a deal that could “give them peace with the Muslim world”, according to a senior Obama adviser.
So. We have "senior adviser" Ross at odds with "senior adviser" X over a signal Obama policy position. Does he or doesn't he? Is this early evidence of a lack of administration discipline, an internal power struggle, or both--or something else? Definitely keeping an eye on this.