The attack on the Jews was launched in The Wall Street Journal, in an unattributed squib reporting that “Israel supporters” were campaigning to force Sununu out. Next, columnists Rowland Evans and Robert Novak wrote of “Sununu’s suspicion” that he was under fire because he was a Lebanese-American who didn’t fully support “Israel’s demands on the United States.” Then The Washington Post said Sununu was telling associates that the foes besetting him included the liberal media, political rivals, resentful underlings–and the Israel lobby. New York Times columnist William Safire, one of those who had criticized Sununu, accused him of descending “into the gutter of bigotry.”
The friction between Sununu and the Jewish community wasn’t new. As New Hampshire governor, he had been the only governor to refuse to condemn a U.N. resolution equating Zionism with racism. He has called for a more “evenhanded approach” to Mideast issues. Sununu was the featured speaker at a May 23 meeting of the Arab-American Council, a new Arab lobbying group. And last month, when he joined in honoring the USS Liberty crew on the White House lawn, Jewish leaders argued that his appearance seemed to reinforce the claim that Israel’s 1967 attack on the ship was not accidental but deliberate.
Jewish leaders were up in arms. The Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations fired off a letter inviting his assurance that the reports of his views weren’t true. In phone calls and letters, the chief of staff told them that “I am not blaming anybody but myself for the flurry of recent events” and denied that he had implicated “anyone or any groups.” Jewish leaders replied with formal relief that the matter was settled. Privately, at least some of them worried that Sununu showed a “clear pattern” of anti-Israeli leanings. The leaders accepted Sununu’s assurances because “they have no choice,” said a source close to Bush and the Jewish community. “I am not sure they believe it entirely, but they are accepting it.”
Sununu made similar efforts to pacify other critics. He hinted to reporters that he might leave the administration in 1993, after Bush’s re-election; that was instantly read as a plea bargain, since he bad talked earlier about staying for the whole second term. And he told unbelieving staffers that he wasn’t angry with them for the leaks to the press about his troubles.
Behind the scenes, however, reporters who had been sympathetic to Sununu offered more tidbits of unsourced criticism of his foes in the White House. In a typical case, columnist Jack Anderson met with Sununu in his West Wing office and hours later reported that Secretary of State James Baker had been fueling the controversy. Other unattributed reports traced to Sununu allies took aim at Craig Fuller, Bush’s vice presidential chief of staff; Robert Teeter, Bush’s campaign strategist, and Peter Teeley, the former campaign press secretary, all of whom have sided against the chief of staff. “We believe all the charges came directly from Sununu,” said a senior Bush aide. “He’s fighting back like a caged animal.” Some aides who had tried to topple “King John” ran for cover when the attempt fell short. NEWSWEEK learned that several cabinet secretaries who had privately attacked Sununu called him last week to pledge support.
Bush himself wanted only to “move on” past the story, top aides said; they speculated that he was keeping his options open and hoping the furor would die. But the upshot of the week’s drama was just the opposite: Sununu kept fueling more page-one stories. And there was no end in sight. In New Hampshire reporters recalled that Sununu had prefigured the White House controversy when he refused to account for his travels in a state-police plane.
How long would Sununu be left dangling? One top Bush aide said he was reminded of the fight over John Tower’s nomination to be defense secretary. “The president stuck with Tower until the bitter end,” he said. “But when he had to, he cut him free.” The cutting time would come, he added, “when it suits” George Bush best politically. No sooner. No later."
