Clinton Sees Smart Power in Smart Development

In her highly-anticipated confirmation hearings to be selected as the next Secretary of State yesterday, Senator Hillary Clinton articulated a bold and comprehensive vision of U.S. foreign policy for the Obama Administration. Perhaps none of her ambitions were more striking than the breadth and depth of her commitments to development as a pillar of foreign policy along with defense and diplomacy. Her testimony marks a heightened focus on development not only as an effective means to advance U.S. foreign policy and to improve America's image in the world, but also as a critical goal in and of itself.

Echoing George Marshall, Clinton spoke of her vision of foreign policy as a tool that can and should do more than address ongoing conflicts such as those in Iraq and Afghanistan. In an ever shrinking world, foreign policy must also confront a new breed of challenges such as global poverty and disease and Clinton's remarks demonstrate an understanding of what such an engagement would require. First, she highlights the comprehensive and interconnected needs involved in truly addressing development. In echoing Obama's own agenda, she referenced that development would encompass, amongst other things, "... eliminating the global education deficit; enhancing US leadership in the effort to combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and TB and improving global health infrastructure; providing sustainable debt relief to developing countries; expanding prosperity through training, partnerships and expanded opportunities for small and medium enterprise; supporting developing countries in adapting to the challenges of a changing climate...." In short, she acknowledges that true development requires a multifaceted and balanced approach as articulated in the internationally agreed upon Millennium Development Goals.

Second, she acknowledges that HOW the U.S. achieves these goals is as important as WHAT it focuses on. Her testimony proposes an approach that partners with nations to ensure that the U.S. isn't just "giving" foreign assistance but rather investing in these countries so that they can sustain their own poverty-alleviation efforts in the long-term. Lastly, she reiterated President-elect Obama's critical commitment to double foreign assistance. This will allow the U.S. to scale up efforts that are working and invest the time and effort to modernize the whole of U.S. development programs so that all elements of the investment made by the American people are working as effectively and efficiently as possible.

Senator Clinton's vision and leadership come at a critical time. America's foreign policy challenges are complicated and cross cutting. The world faces a series of conflicts, challenges to democracy, financial upheaval and humanitarian threats like the food crisis. But America is also at a point where it has tested and proven the potential of development to impact those challenges. Clinton's goal of making defense, diplomacy, and development the centerpiece of US foreign policy won't be easy, but if the new Administration follows through on the commitments that Hillary Clinton has made, a focal point for the Obama national security doctrine will be a robust, effective, innovative development program. Of course, ensuring the success of these development priorities will require working vigorously with Congress to enact funding and legislation. The true three pillared approach highlighted yesterday is the right mix to confront these challenging times. Hillary Clinton has shown she shares Obama's vision to make it a reality. We look forward to taking the first step with her.

Comments

[JazzPuff]

I for one, am VERY happy that the Senate Panel is endorsing Sen. Clinton, to become the Secretary of State. And I commented on this so long ago. Sen. Hillary Clinton is Smart Power a Smart Politician and beyond that a Smart Woman. She will effectively engage in conversations with our allies and negotiate diplomacy in those countries we would like to see change. I feel that internationally, the Clintons our well respected and deservedly so. But, individually Hillary stands out and will be that leading echo for Obama's Administration, and their ideology of change

[ApolloSpeaks]

SMART POWER VS BUSH'S DUMB POWER

Is this the same "smart power" that we saw in action during the 1990s when bin Ladin's contempt for America was so great that he called us a "paper tiger" who could easily be defeated? Is that the "smart power" Hillary was talking about? Funny, but I don't recall bin Ladin calling America a "paper tiger" during the dumb power years of George W. Bush.

[Pulemerci]

Hillary is "smart?" She didn't know her husband had been having affair after affair (while the rest of the country knew he was a philanderer). She was tricked by Bush into voting for the war. Her campaign for POTUS was a disaster which is heavily in debt to this day. But she's "smart." Thank goodness. Imagine if she wasn't smart?

[tokitori]

Love her! She'll be fantastic. Great choice, Obama.

[stell]

This refinement of the status quo, and so-called "smart power" will not work. She uses blanket statements on nations ( I was watching her), calling them autocratic, and so forth. She sounds like George W. Bush. Why does Obama have to foist her upon us? Because he couldn't find something else for her to do?

[tokitori]

Ha! She sounds NOTHING like George W. Bush. He only WISHES he were as articulate and knowledgable!

[closetodemfection]

You have got to be kidding. Time for a new pair of glasses and a hearing aid.

[joebhed]

I try to keep an open mind on the Clinton nomination.
But I'm having a hard time.

She takes the position that we need to ESCALATE the pressure on Iran, with greater sanctions, because Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons, when there is no proof and no evidence that such is the case.
The sanctions imposed on Iran are for enriching uranium, an inalienable right under the NPT, under the watchful eye of the International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA).
The IAEA says there is no evidence of a weapons program in Iran.

And Clinton's refusal to have any dialogue with the elected leaders of the Palestinians unveils the lack of substance to our claim to support democracy, at least for the Palestinian people.

Under these circumstance, foreign policy in the Middle East will be a carbon copy of that of the cowboy now heading down the trail.

Clinton and Obama are really dialogue-ing the dialogue thing.
But their actions on these two major policy matters shows no sign of a Democratic detente.
Rhetoric.
And propaganda.
Same old, same old.

[PlaceboStudman]

You honestly, truly believe that the IAEA reports are more valid and respectable than the faulty reports Bush used to claim that Iraq had WMDs? It is a given fact that Iran HAS enriched uranium, and if you do not believe that they will use that enriched uranium to pursue a nuclear weapon, then you are niave and completely ignorant in watching and listening to Iran's inflamatory militant stance against Israel.

I for one have NO doubt that Iran has the desire, and with enriched uranium, the full capability of making a nuclear bomb, and has every intention of doing so in the very near future....­like within the next 4 or 8 years

[joebhed]

StudMAN

I'm not sure if you're serious, but, just in case you are......

1. It was the IAEA and the UN inspectors who said THERE WERE NO WMDs in Iraq. If you have any proof otherwise, please inform.

2. I have stated, and the IAEA has confirmed, that Iran has enriched uranium - LOW-enriched uranium, which is its INALIENABLE rights under treaties that WE have signed. LOW-enriched uranium is not capable of making nuclear weapons.

3. I doubt that Iran will pursue nuclear weapons because they correctly state that a nuclear war is total insanity in the Middle east. They have called for a nuclear-we­apons-free zone in the Middle East, as have all countries, EXCEPT ISRAEL.

4. Iran's position viz Israel is well known, they have never supported the state of Israel. But they have never attacked Israel or any of their fiercest enemies, and never threatened to attack Israel.

I, for one, do not care what you, for one, think about Iran's capabilities and its intentions. That is your belief.
Any country in the world that is enriching uranium could likely have the capacity to build a nuclear weapon in eight years.
How come we aren't trying to drive their economies into the poorhouse with sanctions and embargo threats?
My point was about Hillary Clinton and the author's claims about the new "smart" diplomacy we can expect.
Our Mideast foreign policy follows the rules of AIPAC.
The opposite of smart.

[harveyr2]

Senator Clinton should not be confirmed as Secretary of State as the AP has shown her to be rather loose with the truth about donations to her hubby impacting her positions. As always the Clintons only care about themselves. As Secretary of State, Senator Clinton will sell out America.

"WASHINGTON – Secretary of State nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton intervened at least six times in government issues directly affecting companies and others that later contributed to her husband's foundation, an Associated Press review of her official correspondence found."

Read all at http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090113/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/clinton_letters___dollars