Hillary Clinton - good SecState for America, or not?

[yellowtail3]

The National Review seems to think highly of her...

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/255885/praise-hillary-clinton-duncan-currie

At the end of 2009, President Obama was weathering criticism for his excessively deferential approach to China and his shortsighted neglect of India. At the end of 2010, his administration deserves much credit for toughening its stance toward Beijing, affirming its commitment to a robust strategic partnership with New Delhi, and boosting America’s security posture across the region.

Three U.S. officials deserve particular recognition: Hillary Clinton, Robert Gates, and Kurt Campbell, the last of whom is Foggy Bottom’s top diplomat for East Asia and the Pacific. Without much domestic fanfare, they have been working aggressively to counter Chinese influence and promote what George W. Bush once called “a balance of power that favors freedom.”

Indeed, over the past seven months, Team Obama has (1) established a new defense framework with Indonesia; (2) announced the resumption of military exchanges with the Indonesian special forces; (3) led multinational peacekeeping exercises in Cambodia; (4) conducted the first joint U.S.-Vietnam military drills since the 1975 fall of Saigon; (5) launched a high-level defense dialogue with the Vietnamese government; (6) obtained membership in the East Asia Summit; (7) tightened financial sanctions against North Korea; [8] bolstered the U.S. alliance with South Korea — and sent a blunt message to Pyongyang and Beijing — through a series of large-scale war games; (9) completed (albeit after much unnecessary haggling) a U.S.-Korea free-trade deal; (10) formalized a new strategic partnership with New Zealand; (11) expanded defense cooperation with Australia; (12) signed a raft of bilateral economic agreements with India while also relaxing curbs on U.S. high-tech exports to the South Asian giant; (13) endorsed a permanent Indian seat on the United Nations Security Council; and (14) held trilateral talks with Tokyo and Seoul.

When it comes to Asian alliance management, Hillary has been superb. I recently chatted with two former Bush-administration Asia hands — both hawkish conservatives — who lavished praise on Clinton for her stewardship of U.S. diplomacy in the Far East. One of them had previously told me that Hillary’s July 2009 speech to the ASEAN Regional Forum (delivered just two months after Pyongyang’s second nuclear test) was “the best statement on North Korea strategy in the past 20 years.”

Addressing that same forum in July 2010, Clinton characterized the ongoing South China Sea territorial disputes as a matter of U.S. national interest and urged a peaceful, multilateral resolution in accordance with international law. Her remarks were greatly appreciated by the ASEAN countries (especially Vietnam) — which have grown tired of frequent Chinese bullying — but they triggered howls of outrage in Beijing, which considers virtually the entire body of water to be its own sovereign jurisdiction. More recently, after a Sino-Japanese maritime incident near the Senkaku Islands (located in the East China Sea and claimed by both Beijing and Tokyo), Clinton angered the Chinese by assuring Japanese foreign minster Seiji Maehara that the Senkakus were protected under the 1960 U.S.-Japan defense treaty. She reiterated that pledge during her October 27 press conference with Maehara in Honolulu. As an Economist correspondent noted, “This drove Chinese diplomats slightly up the wall.”

To be sure, Hillary has sought to deepen U.S. engagement with China on a wide range of issues, but she has also pursued a vigorous campaign to strengthen American relations with other Asia-Pacific countries, including both longtime allies (Japan, South Korea, Australia) and emerging powers (India, Vietnam, Indonesia). This, essentially, was the Bush strategy. On North Korea, the Obama administration has actually been “more hardline, more conditional, more neoconservative than Bush was during the last four years of his term,” former CIA analyst Bruce Klinger said recently.

Repeated North Korean and Chinese provocations have obviously made it easier for Hillary & Co. to enhance U.S. partnerships throughout the region. But Clinton should be applauded for her diplomatic spadework, which reflects a tough-minded realism. “Much of the history of the 21st century will be written in Asia,” she declared on October 28. All the more reason to commend her achievements.

[beerbelly]

She like Obama don't have a clue! Their foreign policy is "why can't we all just get along" and we know America has screwed up the world , but we are trying to do better! They are idiots!

[billy_56081]

Yeah nothing like disarming ourselves.

[wreckhog]

Relative to Rice and Powell? All the same. Has not been a memorable one since Kissenger.

[beerbelly]

You have got to be kidding! Kissenger should have been tried for treason for selling us out to the north Vietnamese! It had to have been treason, no one can be that stupid!

[magooch]

I guess if being a liar and a bitch are what qualifiies one for Secretary of State, well Hitlary fits right in.  She wouldn't have made it on my list, but then neither would that Madeline Notbright woman.

[GRIMJIM]

Better secretary of satate than president.

[Savage .250]

H. Clinton :  Impossible to trust

Kissenger: I thought he gave away the farm when he was Sec of State.

[Cabin4]

Secretary Clinton supports the UN global small arms gun ban, Cap & Trade, National Federal Required Health Care and other UN global warming initiatives designed to rape the American people of thier wealth. Need I say more.

[Pat/Rick]

A clinton? good for America?Umm uhh, uhaw,haw,haw,hahahahahahahahahahaha, woo hoo, thats rich!!

[yellowtail3]

Gee, not a single post addressing the substance or points of the NRO article.

[Cabin4]

That's because most people really don't care to much about all these type of performance assessments. Most of it is bs. Who cares about our military drills with Vietnam or Cambodia as an example. Our country is falling apart and we are wasting money in SE Asia on military drills. Why is our military there? Why does our federal government have troops deployed all over the globe? Why is this the USA's role in the world? I see this as nothing more than a big giant failure. Clinton is a globalist and she is serving a globalist in the White House and the UN. There is no charter in our constitution for the US to be the world’s police or serve in this capacity.

[Dixie Dude]

I am against the "free trade" agreements if they aren't "fair trade".  Otherwise we loose more industry.  I do agree we should support India over China, since India is a true democratic state with several political parties.  No free trade until the country we trade with passes, child labor laws, minimum wage laws, 40 hour workweek laws, environmental laws, anti-discriminitory laws, workplace safety laws, and has a social security system or some type of retirement system.  China has none or very few of these.  We can't compete labor wise with that.  China should let their currency float or face tarriffs on their goods, and begin to have a true democratic system of government.  About 45% of everything they make comes to the US.  So, we slap tarriffs on their goods to buy back our debt from them.  Indonesia needs to clean up their pirate situation. 

[wreckhog]

That's because most people really don't care to much about all these type of performance assessments. Most of it is bs. Who cares about our military drills with Vietnam or Cambodia as an example. Our country is falling apart and we are wasting money in SE Asia on military drills. Why is our military there? Why does our federal government have troops deployed all over the globe? Why is this the USA's role in the world? I see this as nothing more than a big giant failure. Clinton is a globalist and she is serving a globalist in the White House and the UN. There is no charter in our constitution for the US to be the world’s police or serve in this capacity.

Since we have been in Korea for 50+ years, this issue covers a A LOT of Secretary of States!

[nomosendero]

Ditto for what Cabin4 said & I agree with TM, stange as that may be, but it's Christmas Season.

[Cabin4]

"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations - entangling alliances with none"
- Thomas Jefferson

[Cabin4]

That's because most people really don't care to much about all these type of performance assessments. Most of it is bs. Who cares about our military drills with Vietnam or Cambodia as an example. Our country is falling apart and we are wasting money in SE Asia on military drills. Why is our military there? Why does our federal government have troops deployed all over the globe? Why is this the USA's role in the world? I see this as nothing more than a big giant failure. Clinton is a globalist and she is serving a globalist in the White House and the UN. There is no charter in our constitution for the US to be the world’s police or serve in this capacity.

Since we have been in Korea for 50+ years, this issue covers a A LOT of Secretary of States!

That is does. I want to hear a Secretary of State say that we need to get our troops out of Korea.

[BBF]

[/quote]

That is does. I want to hear a Secretary of State say that we need to get our troops out of Korea.
[/quote]


...........and most other foreign places as well IMO

[teamnelson]

The NRO article indicates that the Obama administration failed in the first year, adjusted course, and did BETTER (not a home run) the second year ... in ASIA. The Sec of State is still responsible for the whole planet. If you read the mentioned documentation from 2009, the State Dept did miserably around the world, particularly in Iraq & Afghanistan where we continue to have troops in harms way. So yes, give her a "Much Improved" for successes in a region which is inclined to cooperate with us to a point already. But still falling short in Africa, Europe, Central Asia, Russia, South/Central America.

I'd have to say that Team Obama identified a region where they felt reasonably confident they could garner a win in the short game, boosting confidence and perception of capability, but still not actually dealing with the large glaring issues hanging out there, like economic collapse of Europe, no legitimate government in Iraq or Afghanistan, etc. I'd like to see them tackle that more effectively before I give a thumbs up.

BTW, I work in a govt office that is wholly interested in Asia, and much of the publicized improvements are as yet to be realized so we're still just really celebrating potential improvement. I guess they give out Nobel Prizes for potential these days, so its all good.

[powderman]

CABIN 4. YEP, hill is a real jewel. POWDERMAN.