home > by publication type > daily analysis > Splitting Hairs on Foreign Policy
Email
| Author: |
|---|
Sens. Clinton and Obama during a Democratic presidential debate in July 2007. (AP /Charles Dharapak)
The Democratic presidential nominating contest between Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) and Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) couldn’t be closer. Neither, at first glimpse, could their foreign policy positions. Take Iraq. Although Clinton voted to authorize the Iraq war and Obama opposed it from the outset (prior to joining the Senate), both have pledged to begin a phased withdrawal of U.S. troops within the first few months of their administrations. Clinton would leave residual forces inside the country to protect U.S. interests and root out terrorists (Foreign Affairs) and so would Obama. Neither Obama nor Clinton has specified the number of troops to be left behind in Iraq. The Illinois senator would escalate military operations in Afghanistan (Foreign Affairs), as would Clinton. Both would also ratchet up diplomacy on ending Iran’s nuclear program. On the globalization front, both promise to end corporate subsidies they believe reward corporations for sending jobs abroad.
In making deeper comparisons, it often comes down to the details, such as the precise timeframe for a complete Iraq withdrawal, or who would conduct diplomacy with Iran and under what conditions. In a rare clear-cut foreign policy disagreement, Clinton would maintain the forty-six-year-old Cuba embargo while Obama would aim for normalizing relations. The two camps have also recently sought to draw distinctions on trade policy. Obama charged that Clinton praised the North American Free Trade Agreement, while the Clinton camp charges that Obama blocked an attempt to strengthen laws that protect against unfair trade practices. Such differences aside, the two Democrats still present a clear counterpoint to some of the foreign policy views of Republican front-runner Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), who supports the Bush administration's Iraq surge strategy and free trade agenda.
Analysts try to draw comparisons between Clinton and Obama by examining their foreign policy advisers. Stephen Zunes, an international affairs professor at the University of San Francisco, says understanding the foreign policy potential (FPIF) of the Democratic front-runners comes down to who’s giving them advice (WashPost) on global affairs, especially the Iraq war. Clinton has assembled an elite group of policy advisers including many foreign policy heavyweights from her husband’s administration. Obama also has managed to attract some ex-Clinton advisers as well as newcomers like human rights expert Samantha Power.
Some analysts said they expect Clinton’s foreign policy to be a repeat of her husband’s administration. An article in the Nation characterizes Clinton’s advisers as more conventional and hawkish while depicting Obama’s overall as “younger, more progressive,” and more likely to emphasize “soft power.” Susan Rice, a former Clinton official at the State Department who advises Obama, said many of the younger former Clinton Administration officials who now support Obama “feel that perhaps it is time for the baton to be passed to the next generation.” But Clinton’s advisers repeatedly stress her foreign policy experience as more substantive, pointing to her moves in 2007 challenging the Pentagon (WashPost) to spell out its planning of the war. In a campaign dispute (BosGlobe) late last year, Obama pointed out his support from former Clinton administration advisers. “They apparently believe that my vision of foreign policy is better suited for the 21st century,” Obama said. Clinton responded: “I’m not holding myself out by leaning on advisers.”
Newsweek International’s Fareed Zakaria says Clinton has laid claims to years of experience, many of the party’s “blue-chip foreign policy advisers,” and the ear of her husband, President Bill Clinton. But he also asserts that Obama’s experience is one of identity, including having an immigrant father and growing up in Indonesia. In Zakaria’s view, Obama’s innate perspective on understanding foreign peoples is just as meaningful as Clinton’s practical knowledge. But some are critical of attempts to equate identity with traditional experience in foreign policy. One such critic, Princeton University's Sean Wilentz, writes that “after seven disastrous years of the Bush experience, otherwise rational editorialists and commentators are insisting that instincts basically are good enough.” It remains unclear, though, how much importance voters are attaching to such distinctions.
Weigh in on this issue by emailing CFR.org.
To order Task Force reports, Council Special Reports, and Critical Policy Choices, please call, fax, or order online from our distributor, the Brookings Institution Press: phone +1.800.537.5487, fax +1.410.516.6998.
For information on other reports that are not for sale, or for general publications information, please call +1.212.434.9516 or email publications@cfr.org.
Start-Up Nation addresses the trillion-dollar question: How is it that Israel—a country of 7.1 million, only sixty years old, surrounded by enemies— produces more start-up companies than large, peaceful, and stable nations like Japan, China, India, Korea, Canada, and the UK? With the insights of geopolitical experts and investors, the authors examine this nation’s adversity-driven culture to answer this question and offer prescriptions for a global economy on the rebound.
In Forces of Fortune, Vali Nasr presents a paradigm-changing revelation that will transform the understanding of the Muslim world at large. He reveals that there is a vital but unseen rising force in the Islamic world—a new business-minded middle class—that is building a vibrant new Muslim world economy and that holds the key to winning the cold war against Iran and extremists.
In Cuba: What Everyone Needs to Know, Julia E. Sweig presents a remarkably accessible portrait of Cuba's unique place on the world stage over the past fifty years, including its internal politics, its often fraught relationship with the United States, and its shifting relationship with the global community.
Complete list of CFR Books
The report of this bipartisan Task Force of distinguished leaders and experts represents a strong consensus on the importance of repairing America's immigration policy. It makes the case that maintaining America's political and economic leadership depends on attracting talented and hard-working immigrants, and on securing the country's borders in a smart, effective, and humane way.
This report finds that nuclear weapons will remain a fundamental element of U.S. national security in the near term, and makes recommendations on how to ensure the safety, security, and reliability of the U.S. deterrent nuclear force, prevent nuclear terrorism, and strengthen the nuclear nonproliferation regime.
About Independent Task Forces at CFR
Complete list of Task Force reports
Identifying international threats and acting on them may be the most difficult job for U.S. policymakers. This report
provides an actionable road map for managing international threats before they erupt into crises and makes a strong case that preventive action is not a luxury but a necessity.
For more than a decade, the United States has mostly watched from the sidelines as Asian countries organize themselves into an alphabet soup of new multilateral groups. In this report, the authors review the relationship between pan-Asian and trans-Pacific institutions and suggest policy guidelines for a new U.S. approach to this new Asian landscape.
Complete list of Council Special Reports
To request permission to reprint or reuse CFR material, please fill out this permissions request form (PDF), referring to the instructions on page 1.
Copyright 2009 by the Council on Foreign Relations. All Rights Reserved.