(4 of 11)
Or by reacting intelligently. The U.S. shift in the Middle East came only after Yasser Arafat finally accepted Israel's right to exist. "Once you're confronted with something someone else has put forward," says Baker, "the measure should be how you turn it to your advantage."
This goes to the heart of Baker's ideas for pursuing the opportunities created by Mikhail Gorbachev's seemingly sincere desire to reform the Soviet Union. Like Bush, Baker does not fear a resurgent Moscow. "If they really reform their economic system," he says, "they'll be more secure at home and thus less inclined to military adventurism abroad." Baker's only worry, it seems, is that Gorbachev's days may be numbered. But as long as Gorbachev retains control, Baker is determined to deal wherever he can.
An example of that determination can be gleaned from Baker's embryonic thinking about eliminating the allied embargo on "dual use" (civilian or military) technology sales to Moscow, a ban the allies imposed following the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979. Now that the Soviets are withdrawing, the Europeans are urging an end to the restrictions. Baker is aware that the proximate reason for the embargo will soon end, but rewarding the Soviets for ceasing activities they never should have begun seems less important to him than trading the embargo's end for further moderations in Moscow's behavior. Linking U.S. actions to future Soviet concessions is what the game is all about. "Give away something unilaterally without a quid pro quo?" says Baker. "No, sir."
Baker, of course, is not operating with a completely free hand. George Bush says he "loves the foreign policy aspects" of his job, and Bush, obviously, is the boss. But the two men have a unique relationship. "They are as close to being equals as any President and a subordinate have ever been," says writer Victor Gold, who has been close to both of them for two decades. Baker may not be Deputy President or Prime Minister, but at the very least, he is first among equals.
To say that Bush and Baker go way back only begins to describe their closeness. Bush brought Baker into politics and firmly believes he would not ^ have become President without him. Nevertheless, the President speaks of Baker as his brother -- his "younger brother," a diminution that signals a certain competitiveness. "It's not unjustified for him to think of me as his protege," says Baker. "But then you have to consider that I took off a lot of time and lost a lot of income working for him in the '80 campaign. That kind of squared the circle. And remember, when I got the chief of staff job with Reagan, that wasn't ((Bush's)) doing."
Baker walked an interesting line during the Reagan years. His first loyalty was to the President, but he saw that Bush was included and had meaningful tasks to perform. "There was tension, of course," says a Bush friend. "Baker ran Reagan's '84 campaign, and Bush had to take direction from him. That was when Bush was made to travel the low road, and it was obvious that he felt Baker was looking out for Reagan first. That was only proper, of course, but George didn't like it anyway."