I’m still not enamored with Obama’s decision to retain Bob Gates as his Defense Secretary or his decision to hand the State Department over to Hillary Clinton. But I’m beginning to see some positives. Ever since John Foster Dulles resigned from office in 1959, the Secretary of State has, much more often than not, played second fiddle to others in foreign policy. In the JFK/LBJ era, Robert McNamara was dominant. In the Nixon era, Kissinger dominated the Secretary of State until he took the position over for himself. As a general matter, Republicans don’t trust the State Department and prefer to use the National Security Council, the intelligence agencies, and the Pentagon to make important foreign policy decisions.
Democrats are more culturally attuned to the State Department, but Carter and Clinton had weak secretaries. Hillary Clinton is not going to be a weak secretary. She is looking to expand the job and take over as much turf as possible. Ordinarily that might be a bad thing, but her power is going to be coming at the expense of the Defense Department (and to an indeterminate degree, the Treasury Department). Secretary Gates is voicing his support for an expanded diplomatic service, and his lame duck status and Republican roots make him institutionally incapable of competing with the former First Lady.
Why do I see this as good? Because it will mark a restoration of the State Department as the premier department of government. And that means that we won’t shoot first and ask questions later. It means we will put a kinder face forward to the rest of the world. It means that State Department will regain its morale and that they’ll be able to recruit the best minds. It’s just good overall.
I don’t like her but want her to succeed in this. Does that make me weird?
No.
It makes you a concerned citizen.
No. Well, yes it makes you “weird” (i.e. not typical) given the current fucked-up political climate in the US where all politics is personal. But it shouldn’t be weird at all.
I don’t trust her either, but I hope the State Dept is successful in refurbishing our image and accomplishing our goals by diplomatic means.
It’s like I said before, if Obama is OK with her in the position then I’ll trust him on that – if she gets out of line then he’ll just fire her / ask for her resignation. So far so good.
Much of our foreign policy for good or ill depends on manipulating the debt of countries–like in LA. This has been uncoordinated and subrosa. At least, as part of the entire State system, it may actually be conducted in concert with our overall policies rather than as a rogue effort by CIA contractors. (I presume everyone has read John Perkins)
‘Because it will mark a restoration of the State Department as the premier department of government.’
THE! I’d think the departments of labor, agriculture, etc., which directly affect the lives of the people who the government is working for, would be ‘the premier departments’ of the U.S. government.
‘Bout time, people.
‘Bout time.
Now that’s some funny shit!!!
Since when does a queen have to be likable? Or a king, for that matter.
Watch. As Obama assumes his kingly role, y’all are going to “like” him less and less.
And respect him more and more.
Watch.
AG
An expanded role for the State Department will also come at the expense of the National Security Adviser.
BooMan, another carefully reasoned assessment of Ms. Clinton and the direction of the State Dept. I concur with your position.
And, Michaela, did you know that John Perkins is deep into leading shamanic workshops at such New Age Centers as Esalen (CA) and Omega(NY)? I have his book but still haven’t got to it. So many other studies are still in the way. Sigh.