Senator Hillary Clinton — now in her virtually-certain-to-be-approved Secretary of State confirmation hearings on Capitol Hill –is vowing that under soon-to-be President Barack Obama the United States will once again have a bipartisan foreign policy that is pragmatic, rather than ideologically based.
But even as she does so, a new wrinkle on the political horizon suggests she’ll take over the State Department under a bit of a cloud: an AP review of her official correspondence finds she intervened “at least six times in government issues directly affecting companies and others that later contributed to her husband’s foundation.”
The overlap of names on former President Bill Clinton’s foundation donor list and business interests whose issues she championed raises new questions about potential ethics conflicts between her official actions and her husband’s fundraising. The AP obtained three of the senator’s government letters under the Freedom of Information Act.
Enough to derail her nomination? Most likely not.
One reason why: Clinton has increasingly gained the respect of members of Congress of both parties and of varying viewpoints.There are already signs now that members of both parties will try and get mechanisms in place to ensure that there won’t be any conflicts with Bill Clinton’s (financial) affairs in the future.
And press coverage of her confirmation hearings suggests her comments Obama is continuing positioning himself not so much as the anti-George Bush, but as someone located in the center of American politics. The danger: the center can shift swiftly, leaving those anchored to it right of center or left of center.
Clinton has vowed that under her at State Department and Obama at the White House “consultation” will not be a pro forma catchword:
Sen. Hillary Clinton said consultation is a commitment and “not a catchword” as she spoke before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee at the start of her confirmation hearing for the position of secretary of state.
“The president-elect and I believe that we must return to the time-honored principle of bipartisanship in our foreign policy, an approach that has served us well,” she said.
Clinton was introduced by Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-New York, who called her “exactly the right person at the right time” to be secretary of state.
Committee Chairman Sen. John Kerry, D-Massachusetts, opened the hearing by saying that Clinton’s “presence overseas will send a strong signal immediately that America is back.”
Kerry called Clinton an “alliance builder” who has “earned the respect of her colleagues” and could help overcome “the polarization of the last eight years,” though he also noted the need for Clinton to address questions relating to the fundraising activities of her husband, former President Bill Clinton.
Sen. Dick Lugar, R-Indiana, said Tuesday that he had proposed several transparency measures to make sure there are no conflicts with Clinton’s fundraising actions.
You can be sure Clinton will have an explanation for any reported or soon-to-be reported conflicts since she is a smart politician, has legal good counsel and some of these conflicts could indeed have explanations that will make sense. It would be a huge political story if these allegations derail her nomination. Most likely, they’ll simply give talk show hosts and bloggers good material.
Bloomberg notes that Clinton’s support was snowballing and increasing before the hearing:
Senator Hillary Clinton arrives at her confirmation hearing today as one of the most famous nominees for U.S. secretary of state in modern times, poised to overcome partisan animosity and secure easy approval.
Clinton has spoken with each senator on the Foreign Relations Committee to preview concerns at a time of multiple threats. The U.S. is fighting two wars and is dealing with crises over Iran’s possible nuclear-arms program and a conflict in the Middle East. Both Republicans and Democrats on the panel praise her command of the issues and point to the fame she can put at the service of U.S. diplomacy.
“I found her to be very knowledgeable, consistent, a hard worker,” said Senator Johnny Isakson, a Georgia Republican on the panel who supported Senator John McCain for president. “She’s been strong on the Middle East,” he said, calling her “a strong supporter of the war on terror.”
In her remarks to the committee, Clinton will emphasize the use of economic and political leverage in foreign policy, according to excerpts of prepared remarks released by her office. She will call for stronger diplomacy, balanced with military power, and will press for more State Department funding.
In terms of bureaucracy, the list above is like a politician calling to celebrate motherhood, be nice to their kids and brush their teeth at night.
But USA Today notes that Clinton’s remarks do contrast with George Bush’s:
Clinton, addressing Senate colleagues with whom she has served for eight years, said the Barack Obama administration would seek to renew its leadership in the world “through diplmacy that enhances our security, advances our interests, and reflects our values.”
“I believe American leadership has been wanting, but is still wanted,” she said in remarks prepared for the hearing.
That was in sharp contrast to comments by President Bush at his final news conference Monday in which he said that only some “elites,” particularly in Europe, felt that the United States had lost its moral leadership in the world over the past eight years.
“America cannot solve the most pressing problems on our own, and the world cannot solve them without America,” Clinton said.
A later AP story gives this perspective:
Like Mr. Obama, Sen. Clinton has said the U.S. should make a more focused commitment to stabilizing Afghanistan and pushing Pakistan to eliminate the havens al Qaeda terrorists have found on its territory.
Both favor closing the prison for terrorist suspects at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Both support the continued expansion of the Army and the Marine Corps, and they share the view that the Bush administration undervalued international diplomacy.
With daughter Chelsea in attendance, Sen. Clinton appeared set to sail smoothly through her hearing before the Senate panel, despite concerns among some lawmakers that the global fund-raising of her husband, former President Bill Clinton, could pose ethical conflicts for her as secretary of state.
Sen. Clinton called for the use of “smart power,” which she referred to as “the full range of tools at our disposal — diplomatic, economic, military, political, legal and cultural — picking the right tool, or combination of tools, for each situation.”
Sen. Clinton, 61 years old, intended to emphasize areas of foreign policy in which she and Mr. Obama think alike, including their conviction that in order to make gains abroad the U.S. needs to strengthen its domestic economy. Republicans aren’t expected to try to block the nomination and have even been generous in their praise of Sen. Clinton.
Clinton’s comments are symbolic in more ways than one:
1. Her statements mark a vow to return to the more traditional way of formulating foreign policy — the method most college and grad students studying foreign affairs learn about. Policy makers basically look at pluses and minuses, draw up best and worst case scenarios, and balance that against the operative definition of national interest. The Bush administration has been accused of formulating policy using ideological considerations or the gut feelings of officials about what’s the proper course.
2. Past — but not all — administrations took care to genuinely consult with Congress, not for political cover, but to genuinely seek out other perspectives and also to ensure a broader base of political support via the traditional political goals of consensus and coalition building. The Bush administration, typified by Vice President Dick “So?” Cheney, who made it clear that polls and other opinions should not take precedence over what the President and Vice President (or members of Congress without Rs in front of their party affiliation) concluded, has been accused of at best paying lip service to the concept of consultation.
3. And, lastly, it’s yet another sign of the marginalization of George Bush’s way of doing business. If anything Obama, who is advised by some people who were close to Bush 41, is pulling in the reins of neo-con dominated foreign policy and putting it back in the direction of how foreign policy was formulated under….George H.W. Bush: a foreign policy that involved getting all your ducks in a row — versus strutting like a dominant rooster.
More blog discussion on Clinton is HERE.
UPDATE: The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder’s headline is: “Clinton: Obama FoPo Will Be Marriage of Principles And Pragmatism” and he also has the complete text of Clinton’s statement to the committee. Read it all HERE.
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.