The star speaker at the 2002 Republican convention made no apologies for his unconventional views (from his party’s perspective) on affirmative action and on a woman’s right to an abortion. He favored both. He was greeted with polite applause as he punched the air and delivered what seemed like a Democratic pitch in a sea of Republican diehards. This was vintage Colin Powell, seizing the opportunity to deliver his message, straight from the gut, whether his Republican colleagues liked it or not. His performance drew rave reviews, prompting some to renew the old doubts about his compatibility with the Republican agenda, and indeed his place in a party that did not seem particularly friendly to the Afro American community. Was he allowing himself to be used as a magnet to attract the black vote in exchange for a prominent role in a Republican administration?

    The jury is still out on Powell’s legacy. And the fact that he is charismatic, intelligent, eloquent and affable makes it difficult for those who disagree with him to do so except in muted tones, careful not to offend the larger audience who see him as the fulfillment of the American dream. The son of Jamaican immigrants, Powell is widely admired and respected by a wide cross section of the American electorate and indeed is seen as a role model not only by blacks, but by most observers who see in him what is sorely lacking in the run of the mill politician: the ability to speak honestly, to stand up for what is right even if he is standing alone. A team player he is, however, as demonstrated by his initial reluctance to go along with the Gulf War against Saddam Hussein, prompting some to nickname him “the reluctant warrior”. But as the consummate military man that he is, once the decision was made by his commander in chief, his loyalty and commitment was never in doubt. His military record and public service after retirement set a whole new standard by which others will be judged.

    This is why Powell’s future in the George W. Bush’s administration is a subject of speculation. On NBC’s Meet The Press today he was asked about this matter, in particular whether he would complete his term as Secretary of State. Never lost for words, and with his political antenna always erect, Powell’s response was what you would expect from a diplomat: “I do not have a term; I serve at the pleasure of the President”. But the fact that these types of questions are being raised at a time when there are substantial policy differences among the heavyweights that comprise Bush’s foreign policy team gives cause for alarm among Powell admirers who fear that he will be the first casualty in the war to define the soul of the Bush administration.

    By all accounts, Powell is a compassionate man. Whether or not he was drawn to serve George W by the latter’s claim to ‘compassionate conservatism’, may not be material. But the fact that he is, or is perceived to be a dove, in an administration that is filled with men and women who take a more hawkish view of America’s role in the world, is material. Take the Middle East conflict for instance. It is no secret that Powell is running into substantial headwinds from the likes of Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and others. There may be even those within the administration who would like to see him fail in his peace efforts in the Middle East. His decision to meet with Chairman Arafat of the Palestinian Authority, from all reports, was not very popular with his colleagues within the foreign policy establishment. And it is easy to see why. Bush himself, who sets the tone for his team to follow, has steadfastly refused to meet with Arafat, hiding behind the lame excuse that he cannot trust the Palestinian leader while cozying up to Israel’s Sharon, a man Bush referred to as ‘a man of peace’.

    It cannot be easy for Powell. On one hand he tries hard to be a team player. On the other hand he cannot completely ignore who he really is. He rose against all odds to be the man he is to day. So he must know a thing or two about what it means to be the underdog, to be the oppressed. This may be partially why he seems to have a determination to serve as the counterweight to the conservative right agenda. Without his presence in the administration US troops would probably on their way to Iraq for the second time. The Palestinian cause would be far more hopeless, and more generally, the face of American policy around the world would be far uglier than it is today.

    Take a couple of examples. While Powell is advocating a more balance approach to the Middle East, both the House and the Senate passed a resolution last week endorsing Israel’s hard line policy against the Palestinians. One House leader, Dick Army of Texas even advocated Israel’s right to keep the West Bank territory that it has been illegally occupying since the 1967 War! How about this for undercutting the Secretary of State’s efforts at peace making? And there is this contentious issue of America moving to renounce a treaty setting up an international criminal court, a treaty that former President Clinton supported but Congress has not yet ratified. Powell’s views on the latter subject is not yet public but it is a fair guess that he may have severe misgivings about this latest example of the kind of unilateral action that makes Europeans, and the rest of the world, for that matter, extremely nervous.