Who's Got the Foreign Policy Experience We Need?
It's getting wild out there.
Bill Clinton told voters in Muscatine, Iowa, yesterday that he had "opposed Iraq from the beginning." Earlier this week, Hillary Clinton claimed she was the "face" of US foreign policy throughout the 1990s. Then, Hillary Clinton said Barack Obama would be the least experienced president we've had since World War II.
Huh?
With respect to the first two statements, the historical record speaks for itself. The latter charge does not hold up to scrutiny. When it comes to foreign policy, several post-war presidents, who were governors not Senators, had less experience upon taking office than will Barack Obama. They include the one who must have misspoken yesterday, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan and, of course, George W. Bush.
Precisely what foreign policy experience would Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama bring to the Presidency?
The osomotic insights Senator Clinton gained from her time in the White House and her travels abroad can only be beneficial, but they are far from sufficient to qualify one for the Presidency, as surely Betty Ford, Rosalyn Carter, Barbara Bush, and perhaps even Laura Bush would concede. More important is the expertise Clinton has gained in her own right, as a Senator, especially through her service on the Senate Armed Services Committee. Still, that experience did not lead her to the same judgment as Senators Byrd, Kennedy, Levin (then Chairman of the Armed Services committee, or Bob Graham (then Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence) to oppose the Iraq war -- the greatest strategic blunder in a generation - or to vote this Fall against the Kyl-Lieberman amendment, which greased the skids for war with Iran.
Similarly, Barack Obama's service in the Senate, and notably his three years on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, including as Chairman of the European Affairs Subcommittee, afford him deep insight into national security issues. Working with Sen. Richard Lugar, Obama passed new measures to halt the proliferation of nuclear materials. Having opposed the Iraq war from the start, Obama was the first major candidate to propose a responsible and comprehensive plan to redeploy our forces safely and press Iraqis to achieve the necessary political progress. His Iraq War De-escalation Act introduced in January 2007 was embraced by the Democratic leadership in the Senate and remains their primary legislative vehicle for ending the war. Obama was also the first Senator to introduce legislation to address the risks posed by over-reliance on unaccountable military contractors, like Blackwater.
Obama has stood up against the march to war with Iran. Instead, he is committed to direct diplomacy, without preconditions, and to increasing pressure on Iran, including through his legislation that would allow states to divest their holdings in companies that do business with Iran. Obama has also led Senate efforts to improve U.S. preparedness for an avian flu pandemic, to halt the genocide in Darfur, increase resources to roll-back HIV/AIDS and to bring stability and peace to war-torn Congo.
But for both Clinton and Obama, it's not only service in the U.S. Senate that matters. It is their other professional and life experience as well.
Senator Clinton spent her formative years in the Chicago suburb of Park Ridge, Illinois, and went on to Wellesley College and Yale Law School. Senator Obama, born of a Kenyan father and Kansan mother, spent his childhood in Jakarta and Hawaii before graduating from Columbia with a degree in International Relations and Harvard Law School, where he was President of the Law Review.
Prior to becoming First Lady, Senator Clinton was a tireless and passionate advocate for children and an accomplished lawyer in public service and private practice. Senator Obama worked as a community organizer on Chicago's South Side. After law school, he shunned a lucrative legal career to practice at a small civil rights law firm and teach constitutional law. He served eight years in the Illinois State Senate where he consistently built bipartisan coalitions to tackle divisive issues such as tax policy and police interrogation techniques.
While their academic and professional paths are not dissimilar, Obama's youth in Indonesia, which Senator Clinton derides, is something very different from Park Ridge.
Those years in Jakarta gave Obama a rare appreciation of the complex and painful post- colonial challenges of South East Asia's giant and the world's largest Muslim country. It afforded him crucial insight into the ways that others see America - ways that too often differ from how we see ourselves. It enabled him to witness first-hand the effects of poverty, political repression, corruption and civil strife - among the most pressing issues of our day. In later years, Obama came to know his Kenyan family, including his grandmother who still lives in a hut on the shores of Lake Victoria. These are no ordinary life experiences for an American president, few of whom have ever lived in the developing world.
Unlike any other candidate for President, Obama is a man of the world and the man for our times. He uniquely embodies the multiple strands of America's heritage. He exemplifies our nation's ability to overcome its tortured history of racial polarization and discrimination. His very election would speak volumes to the world about America's ability to change and grow and learn from past mistakes. At a time when the world is wondering if America even gets that it makes mistakes, Barack Obama personifies the promise of what America can still be.
And belief in that promise is precisely what we need to re-enlist international support to confront unprecedented global security challenges, ranging from terrorism to climate change, pandemic disease to nuclear proliferation. We need a leader who recognizes that we cannot go "back to the future" but we must build a new future born of ambitious vision and of hope not fear.
We need a unifier who will win with a mandate for meaningful change. At this pivotal moment in our history, we need a President with unique life experience, judgment and sensitivity to the rest of the world's aspirations and frustrations. Now is the time for that President who can renew trust in America's ability to lead not only for ourselves but also for the common good.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Maybe stop thinking "we are the most free, have the best criminal justice system, the only true democracy in the world." Maybe just leave the arrogance behind, because that is the demise of this country.
I think I remember Powell said in the early 90ties, that the world would accept US as a hegemoni, the just power in the world.
Forget that. It never was.
It's like a Chinese menu with only two choices--You can have Kung Pao Chicken or Mongolian Beef!
I'm taking my wallet, and my votes, down the street to that new Thai place where they still offer you some choices, and a few specials not even on the menu!
The US needs a new foreign policy which must include not only immediately ending the illegal war in Iraq but also closing all foreign military bases.
The US must stop being the World's police and must mind its own business.
Hillary's experience is in spinning the truth and fighting republicans. Not a bad choice if our goal is to stick it to the Republicans. A revenge strategy if you will. Barack Obama has real life experiences. He has empathy for every man, woman and chid on the planet. He's in it for all the right reasons. I believe he truly wants a better America. He's the right choice if we want to move away from the red/blue state fights, if we want united states. He's the right choice if we want hope and inspiration. He IS the right choice.
I applaud this piece. It says what I have so long felt about Obama and what he brings to the table in terms of how we handle foreign policy.
An understanding, ANY understanding of varying cultures can only be a plus in light of our current problems.
You made some really valuable observations in this piece - most especially the point you made so clearly about Obama's direct experience living in a 3rd world country.
We are so insular in the United States. We simply have no idea of how the majority of the world sees "reality." We are often wrong, and almost never uncertain. I think you're right - Obama is the single candidate with the most relevant experience in exactly what it will take to formulate a sane foreign policy for this country. Bill Clinton is a charming man, and God save us all from another 8 years of Nafta.
To have a foreign policy expert would be a great help BUT an entrenched and monolithic israeli lobby backed by AIPAC and forty three jewish members of congress, NeoCons,a large group of self-erving politicains in Congress and the executive branch AND a considerable segment of the media, WILL not allow such foreign policy expert to do his job.
Terrific commentary. It sums up why Barack Obama is the best choice for President. We need a president who "gets it" on foreign policy, not another neocon. It is time for the US to be respected for its values and to return to a position of respected leadership, rather than to continue to try to bully the rest of the world.
Thank you for writing that. One of my chief original reasons for interest in Obama was his background. Having lived much of my childhood in Liberia and Kenya, and having lived in Italy as an adult, I know the advantages of absorbing and understanding the ideas and the mores of a culture completely foreign to your own.
As far as I can see, Obama is the future and also the present that so many are too blind to see. He is of mixed race, as are so many of his countrymen. His mixed heritage is a treasure that only enriches his empathy for others. And he has developed a more global perspective than would be possible for anyone growing up entirely in this country.
If ever we needed a leader with a truly global perspective, this is the time.
None of them will end the war.We will be in another war before the next Presidents term is over.I can't beleive anyone can't see that.
Oh, from the title I thought this would be about Richardson and Biden, not those two lightweights Clinton and Obama.
Foreign policy experience is extremely critical. Otherwise, you may have a situation in which the President, having no vision of his or her own, is too easily swayed by foreign policy ideologues. Sound familiar?
There is no question that Barack Obama is a very intelligent man. However, it is admirable to say that he was against the invasion of Iraq but never had to vote on it. The vote for condemning Iran (Kyle/Lieberman bill) was cast without his dissenting vote. I agree that hope is a huge issue in this country since the reign of King George has been so devastating however it is good to remember that as someone else stated before, Jimmy Carter and George Bush each came into the Presidency without much experience and both had the worst administrations on record. Jimmy Carter's argument at the time, was that he was not part of the "Washington Insiders", a claim that Barack is making as well. He did not have the expertise to know how to make things work. He was also very idealistic about how he was going to change the government. If one would take the time to compare Carter's message of hope and change and Obama's message of hope and change, they are relatively the same. What does that hope and change encompass? I haven't heard anything concrete as of yet. Anyone can preach change but how will it be carried out. There is no history there to support his claims. Like it or not, there are other candidates,ie: Clinton, Biden and Richardson who have the experience and background to make a difference. Just saying " I will take this country in another direction" doesn't make it so.
Well this is a pretty scary article--the judgment of an 8 year old child is listed as rational for his foreign policy experience!!! I hope no Repugs read this article, because IF Obama does win (and I think he will not), I can just see the TV ads now...Whil
Bill Richardson also was raised in a developing country, Mexico--and still maintains connections with that country, since his sister and mother live there.
Richardson not only has legislative experience (14 years of it), but practical experience dealing with affairs in the Middle East, Africa, Asia and Latin America and to this day still sent on missions to negotiate for the US even under a Republican Administration.
The Governor has extensive executive experience, both in National Government as well as in State Government.
And Checkmoot, I think 6 foot 2 is a pretty good size for a President, don't you think?
When he takes office, he can hit the ground running not only in Foreign Affairs, but also in Domestic Affairs (which the way the sub-mortgage meltdown is going may be the key priority in 09).
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
