On Clinton at State
by Taylor Marsh
With Clinton "on track" for State, the choice of Gen. Jim Jones for national security advisor adds more strength, but one that will likely cause caterwauling. The pieces of the national security puzzle are fitting slowly into place revealing that President-elect Obama is not only shoring up perceptions, but also triangulating to strengthen his ability to walk in and make the final push on any national security issue easier. I'm getting more confident about our foreign policy by the day. Others, not so much. But what many do not understand is that in order to change the workings, Obama will still be going through the same old channels, some ancient, that don't move swiftly, by utilizing people who can grease the path for Obama's brand new way of dealing and negotiating on national security. By building a team of trusted and known names that show a picture of stability beside the new guy, Obama is free to be as bold as he wants. He's in no way compromising on his own vision. He's got cover, if you will, as well as schooled hands, like Jones (former Marine Corps commandant and supreme commander of NATO, with a Joe Biden lean on foreign policy, by his own admission), whose presence sends multiple signals, to watch his back. Obama knows how smart this is to build into his national security team in a world that moves slower than we'd all like, even if others do not.
Spencer Ackerman writes that "Some foreign-policy experts in the Obama orbit are expressing frustration." Spencer's account talks a lot about people's "fears." No doubt they have them, but it's hilarious that so called "foreign-policy experts," the people to whom Spencer is speaking, don't get what Obama seems obviously to be doing.
Of course, it's all about the people with whom President-elect Obama's potential Madame Secretary might surround herself.
But the real frustration underlying all the hand wringing? Iraq. After all these years, regardless of HRC's innumerable statements on that war in the shadow of the vote, "some foreign-policy experts" can't get over HRC's stance on the Iraq war, circa 2002. Never mind Biden was for the war, as was John Kerry, their statements of change regarding their votes accepted, while HRC's is not. It's remarkable how stuck in the past "some people" are on matters of national security where Clinton is concerned, especially "some foreign-policy experts in the Obama orbit."
HRC, circa July 2007:
"We cannot effectively address any of these challenges if we continue our military engagement in Iraq. As long as we stay there, our military strength will continue to erode. Our standing in the world will continue to decline. Our enemies in the region will continue to exploit our failures. Our occupation will continue to serve as a recruitment tool for terrorists. Our support for Afghan democracy, our conflict with the Taliban, and our hunt for al Qaeda will continue to be compromised. And our brave men and women will continue to lose their lives and suffer grievous wounds."[...] "This will be a first step towards restoring Americans moral and strategic leadership in the world-- one that draws on the strength of our alliances and the power of our diplomacy, and uses military force as a last -- not a first -- resort. .... .." - Hillary Clinton
Anyone not fully aware of Clinton's complete transformation on Iraq is not paying attention and even more worth watching that HRC herself.
The other issue is the outright disrespect, lack of confidence and complete disregard for President-elect Obama's force and power as president. After getting Obama elected, now he's being questioned for not knowing what he's doing in the one area that made more people gravitate to him than any experience he did or did not have. His intuitive judgment, as well as his ability to see forward, but also surround himself with the absolute best, while plotting how relationships will play out in his head. The man is not exactly an idiot, so I wish his own most ardent fans would quit reacting to his decisions like he is.
Obama's likely got many dreams for his foreign policy, one likely being progress in the Middle East. There is no one with stronger credentials than the senator from New York, Hillary Clinton. Coupled with Barack Hussein Obama, where his middle name works, the two are a formidable team, in perception alone.
Additionally, Obama's anti war credentials, along with his strong stance on diplomacy first, made "some foreign-policy" experts in the traditional realm of U.S. national security nervous. Clinton, known as "hawkish," presents not only a perfect balance to the perceived impression of the 21st century new tract foreign policy ideas of Obama, but allows a Nixon in China moment for him (as I've written before) in the Middle East. With HRC representing him, Obama's reach out to Palestinians could provide a path to breakthrough we haven't seen since WJC was in office. Same goes for Iran. Clinton's "hawk" to Obama's new approach combines a balanced signal, with HRC's tough language and approach complimented by Obama's equally tough, but wholly new persona as someone who was anti war on Iraq from the jump.
President-elect Obama and the potential of Clinton as Madame Secretary offers the widest ranging strengths and game plans we've seen on foreign policy in decades, with Jones adding more depth, especially on the NATO side as Obama plans to focus on Afghanistan. Hillary has shown she's a team player, beyond question, and knows first hand through watching her husband how the secretary of state and the president must work together and that only one person sets policy. That will be President Obama. The good news for him is while she obviously respects him, she is not afraid to give her opinions and good advice, including on world leaders whom she has met or knows personally, though they certainly know her, as she's beloved around the world.
But what HRC at State offers to the oppressed women of the world is a human rights issue that could catapult President Obama into shining light that will once and for put in the global glare the abuse, oppression and horrors women around the world face everyday. It's the stuff of which presidential legacies are made, people freed, and countries stabilized.
Click here to read more developments and analysis on Obama's cabinet picks
Follow Taylor Marsh on Twitter: www.twitter.com/taylormarsh
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
personally ,i cant support these picks for foreign policy. there are better people for these jobs that would be more acceptable to many of those who support barack. especially if he had picked someone like wes clark, richardson or hagel for these positions. i dont care for 'continuity'. and i want a sos who actually has diplomatic skills and experience. i think bill richardson may have gotten 'pushed aside' for the hillary 'bargain'. i don't like those kind of 'politics of the past' deals and voted to be done with them.
I speak as one who voted for that "intuitive judgment." It's not showing, so far.
I didn't support HRC during the primaries but I am fully supportive of having her as SOS. She is shrewd, tough and intelligent.
Obama hasn't been inaugurated yet, and he's already "triangulating"?!
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
We've had enough of the politics of fear, thank you.
This election year has brought a multitude of new voters, and that's great. But new voters tend to be unfamiliar with the nature of politics.
And the nature of politics is that people claw at each other while vying for the nomination and the election, but once it's over, like two boxers, they embrace, profess their respect for each other, and move on. With both Hillary and McCain, Obama stayed above the fray, as if he always knew he was going to win and didn't want to have to "take much back." His opponents have a few more statements to back away from, but that's okay. In embracing each other, they show the world that they are big enough to get past the small stuff, and we should be too.
Ms. Marsh, was pretty passionate in her preference for Hillary during the primaries, but I'm sure she knew all along that once the dust settled, there would be only one choice... to back the nominee, and ultimately the President. The more rabid pro-Hillary-ites on her site, and the more rabid Obamaphiles here are requiring a little more time to realize that war is over and we have a much more important fight now.
Thankfully, Obama, Hillary and all the other former partisans are big enough to realize what is important and what is old news.
It may be a team of rivals, but more important, it's a team of giants, and that's what we need right now.
I commend you Taylor, for being on point and standing up for both Hillary and Obama in one sentence: ...trustin
What I find interesting is all the collumnist's and reporters who are so willing to attack her.
She wasn't given a football team, or a 250 million dollar building in Florida, or even a pass with a Silverado Saving's & Loan. No, but they will look for dirt, like they are searching for the first sign of fat on Jack Lallane, with a magnifying glass,
It's not enough that woman has rolled up her sleeves and worked dilligently for everything she has ever achieved, and she has achieved more than most.
Nothing has been given to Hillary Clinton, save the attacks that are fast and hard in coming from what amounts to little more than movie critics who cannot actually make a movie themselves.
She has worked long and hard all her life, and she has worked for a better world, for all of us.
Stop the cheap shots already on this tremendous human.
Taylor: I chuckled when you wrote about Obama's ardent supporters who are still harping on Hillary's Iraqi war vote. I admit that I was a Hillary supporter during the primaries and did not turn to Obama until almost up to election day. I did vote for him, but he wasn't my idea candidate. However, I have cut himmore slack as president-elect than his own "ardent supporters
Doubtless these hand-wringers are the same ones who were hand-wringing and screaming that Obama wasn't attacking McCain hard enough after the RNC. They need to learn to trust their new Prez a little bit. The man knows exactly what he is doing, and how to get there without completely turning his back on those whose views are dissenting. That ability is what could make him a "Great" President.
This is a vert astute post. Well reasoned, thought out, and researched. You can expect to get completely drilled! lol
Thank you, Taylor. I needed that!
Very well thought out and right on. So - write on!!
Taylor has always offered a deeper understanding of the issues than most of the "serious" commenters of the beltway from whom there has been a lot of hand wringing on the Ms Clinton choice for SOS!
Very well put. I was initially hesitant about his pick of Mrs. Clinton, really due to Mr. Clinton and the impact he would have, but I feel confident that she is capable of doing the job. I still worry a bit that she might not have the day to day experience doing the job. I agree that she has seen how it's done, and she has valuable policy experience, but I think it will be a work in progress to see how she interacts with other foreign leaders and how well she can carry out a game plan. She never seems to dissapoint, so I'm looking forward to her tackling some very tough situations.
"She never seems to disapoint"???
You were pleased with her clueless/spineless leadership during the Bush years?
You were pleased with her Rovian/bankrupt primary campaign?
I say it's about time sanity prevails at Huffington Post. And your post/column is the sanest as of yet. Bravo!
I agree! I stopped coming here before the election because it was pointless. Between people complaining he wasn't attacking enough, and the folks who were still upset about Mrs. Clinton not getting the democratic nomination, it was tough to read through any comments. It seems that the point where we figure out that Mr. Obama is very skilled and has a clear idea of what he's doing, never seems to get across!
Wow Taylor,
This is interesting- first I noticed your column is pretty much buried here at HP- then comments are O even though I have made one.
I have come back and refreshed but not showing up.
strange.
I'd think the CDS folks would be out in force in order to scathingly offer their well thought out assessment of your arguments.
;-)
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
