|
Edited on Mon Dec-01-08 06:40 PM by Bad Thoughts
Let me speculate a little. I'm not a fan of Clinton, but I respect her skills and her ability to work with complex organizations. Though I'm not impressed with her credentials for diplomacy, I think that she brings enough political capital and know-how to reshape the State Department after a decade (perhaps more) of neglect. She has the tools to succeed in the position. But how will she operate?
What is being overlooked is that she won't be in as influential position as some might think. The Sec. of State has been, after Kissinger, the third most influential part of the President's cabinet and staff, following NSA and Sec. of Defense. Defense has greater resources, a greater budget, more manpower, and as many connections to foreign leaders as State. The centrality of Afghanistan and Iraq have enhanced the diplomatic importance of Defense. Changing the balance will take a lot of work for Clinton, with generous support from Obama.
Overall, Obama's nominations are impressive, and in terms of diplomatic knowledge and experience, Clinton could be crowded out (though with difficulty). Gates, Jones and Rice (elevated to cabinet position) could have significant sway over foreign policy matters. If he is made part of the Cabinet as well, Richardson will be able to summon a hefty voice in international relations (even from Commerce). Calling this a "national security team" tends, moreover, to shift the emphasis away from State: it supports the notion that the purpose of foreign policy is to protect the country.
I tend to think that going rogue will be less of a problem. Instead, I wonder whether she will feel constrained in her new position. Can she work with the "team of rivals"?
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
