U.S. Foreign Policy

I just returned from the Brookings Institution, where I heard Secretary Clinton deliver a speech previewing the United States' priorities during next week's U.N. General Assembly session.

Before diving into her speech though, Clinton remarked on President Obama's announcement yesterday of changes in the U.S. missile defense program. She said the new system stemmed from a "lengthy and in-depth assessment" of the threats posed by Iran and is based on the United States' "best understanding of Iran's capability."

The new system will "deploy sooner," be "more comprehensive," and have a "better capacity to protect." Clinton said it will "deploy technology that's actually proven" to work and "does what missile defense is actually supposed to do." She added that criticisms of the new system are "not connected to the facts."

Then Clinton delved into her official remarks. Nonproliferation of nuclear weapons will be the main topic that the United States will address next week. Clinton will lead the U.S. delegation to a conference on the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, the first time that a U.S. secretary of state has attended such a conference.

Another key topic for the United States next week will be Iran. The issue isn't Iran's right to develop nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, she said. Rather, she firmly stressed, the problem is that for years Iran has not lived up to its responsibilities to demonstrate that its program is "exclusively for peaceful purposes."

Clinton said that the United States' past refusal to engage Iran had yielded no progress and added, "We remain ready to engage." (Whether Iran is ready to engage on talking nukes, however, is an entirely different story.)

Some other tidbits:

•Clinton said the United States and Iraq have entered a new, "more mature partnership."

•Clinton will be chairing a session on women, peace, and security at the U.N. General Assembly session. She said, "If women are free from violence and afforded their rights," they can be "change agents."

•On corruption, Clinton said it was a "security problem," not just a "good government concern."

•Finally, at the end, Brookings Institution President Strobe Talbott asked Clinton about U.S. health-care reform. Clinton said, "We're going to be successful," but went on to say it "won't be pretty."

Photo: MANDEL NGAN/AFP/Getty Images

In a letter to the editor, someone disagrees with FP blogger David Rothkopf's glowing Washington Post op-ed about how Secretary Clinton is "quietly revolutionizing" U.S. foreign policy. 

In yesterday's Washington Post, FP blogger David J. Rothkopf wrote a lengthy op-ed about how Secretary Clinton is "quietly revolutionizing" U.S. foreign policy, "overseeing what may be the most profound changes in U.S. foreign policy in two decades -- a transformation that may render the presidencies of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush mere side notes in a long transition to a meaningful post-Cold War worldview."

Rothkopf writes that Clinton is tackling many future-oriented issues:

--How to deal with nonstate actors

--Moving from Madeleine Albright's idea that the United States is an "indispensable nation" to recognizing "the indispensability of collaborating with others"

--Prioritizing engagement with emerging powers such as China, India, and Russia (Rothkopf says Clinton has sounded the "death knell for the G-8 as the head table of the global community.")

--Harnessing the power of information technology (remember text "Swat"?)

--Giving prominence to women's issues (creating the position of ambassador at large for women's issues and bringing attention to rape in Congo).

--Reviewing the State Department's priorities with its new Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review

The list goes on, but Rothkopf makes clear the Clinton is revolutionizing U.S. foreign policy in her own quiet way while many others are simply "missing the forest for the pantsuits."

Over at FP's Shadow Government blog ("notes from the loyal opposition"), some people think Secretary Clinton laid the smack down too hard:

• Peter Feaver thinks that when Clinton said the Pakistani government was "abdicating" to the Taliban, she stated her views "undiplomatically."
• My colleague Christian Brose thinks Clinton should be holding her tongue when it comes to publicly criticizing Pakistan.

As a woman, does Clinton feel pressure to come on hard and tough? If she hadn't spoken out when the Taliban were a mere 60 miles from the Pakistani capital, would some have perceived her as too soft?

I'm pressed for time today, unfortunately, so here's one more link and Secretary Clinton's schedule:

• "Obama-Clinton proves a winning team" (CNN.com)

11:30 a.m. Signing Ceremony with His Excellency Cristian Diaconescu, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Romania

Photo: Brendan Smialowski/Getty Images

Today, May 1, marks Hillary Clinton's 100th day at U.S. secretary of state. (She was sworn in Jan. 21, and we're counting Jan. 22 as Day 1.)

Yesterday, I posted a roundup of views regarding Clinton's first 100 days. Two days ago, the State Department posted its "100-Day Report," in which it stated, "In the first 100 Days of the Obama Administration, Secretary Clinton and the State Department have made significant progress in advancing America's national security goals and promoting America's values around the world." (Obviously, being put out by the State Department, the report only states the positive, declaring that "early and significant progress" has been made on a range of priorities.) More about the report is available in this Associated Press article, "Cue the Fanfare: State Trumpets Clinton's 100 Days."

Just in time for Clinton's 100th day, Time named Clinton one of the 100 most influential people in the world, placing her in the "leaders & revolutionaries" category. Writing for Time, Madeleine Albright, the first female U.S. secretary of state (and who served under Clinton's husband Bill) had this to say:

Can Hillary adjust [to being a diplomat]? She already has. It helps that no one doubts her courage, toughness or brains and that everyone knows who she is. It helps more that despite living under intense scrutiny for so long, Secretary Clinton knows exactly what she believes. The mission of public service is in her bones.

Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images

A cursory Internet search finds these views of Secretary Clinton's first 100 days:

For his list of 100-days winners, Chris Cillizza at The Fix (a Washington Post blog) selected Clinton:

Who would have thought that in less than one year Clinton would go from a defeated presidential candidate to the country's top diplomat? Clinton['s] decision to leave politics (forever?) has paid off as her approval number[s] are through the roof. (A mid-March CNN poll showed 71 percent of Americans approved of the job she was doing as secretary of state.) Clinton has been measured and effective as an advocate for the president's policies and has shown an amazing adaptability as she moves from political circles to diplomatic ones.

Charles Wolfson, State Department reporter for CBS News, writes:

For those who forecast that Hillary Clinton would have trouble playing second fiddle to her former political foe, senior officials who have watched the two say she knows who the boss is and has had no problem accommodating herself to her new role.

Over at Politico, David Cloud writes:

In less than 100 days, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did something that neither Colin Powell nor Condoleezza Rice was able to accomplish in their entire tenures: She restored the State Department to the central place in U.S. foreign policy.

…

"What Clinton has done and the president has done is to say clearly that diplomacy is a national security tool of the United States," said Marc Grossman, a career foreign service officer who served as undersecretary of state during the Bush administration. "The only tool is no longer just the military."

Over on the other side of the Atlantic, the BBC seems to concur about placing diplomacy center stage (it does need to update Clinton's mileage to 74,107, however):

By the president's side is a straight-talking secretary of state with her own star-power and some 60,000 air miles already under her belt - Hillary Clinton.

The administration's new emphasis on diplomacy means the state department is squarely back at the heart of America's efforts to engage with the world, from allies to rivals.

Of course, there are some negatives. Here are a few:

--David Cloud at Politico mentions that in the first 100 days there hasn't been much in the way of "diplomatic breakthroughs, peace deals or the standard measurements of State Department success." On the other hand, he admits that these types of accomplishments can't be expected to happen in a mere 100 days.

--Then there was the blooper with the reset button that Clinton gave to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. Instead of saying "reset" in Russian to indicate wanting to press the reset button on U.S.-Russia relations, the button had printed on it a Russian word that translated to something along the lines of "overload."

--Additionally, many Americans were upset when Clinton played down human rights when she visited China in February. On human rights in China she said, "Successive [U.S.] administrations and Chinese governments have been poised back and forth on these issues, and we have to continue to press them. But our pressing on those issues can't interfere with the global economic crisis, the global climate change crisis, and the security crisis."

--Then, of course, there's the whole issue about reaching out to Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez.

Secretary Clinton delivered even more testimony today, speaking about the State Department's FY2009 supplemental appropriations request, as seen in the photo above. Her schedule today:

9:00 a.m. Testimony before House Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Rayburn House Office Building, Room 2359.

2:30 p.m. Bilateral with His Excellency Kasit Piromya, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Thailand.

3:25 p.m. Welcome Children of Department Employees, “Take Your Child to Work Day,” Acheson Auditorium.

4:00 p.m. Meeting with President Obama and Vice President Biden

Photo: Mark Wilson/Getty Images

Speaking in front of the House Foreign Affairs Committee yesterday, a gutsy Secretary Clinton told it like it is.

With Islamist militants just 60 miles from Islamabad, the capital of nuclear-armed Pakistan, she declared: "[We] cannot underscore [enough] the seriousness of the existential threat posed to the state of Pakistan by the continuing advances."

As you may know, a recent "peace" deal in Pakistan gave control of Swat Valley to pro-Taliban militants who have been imposing their extremist version of sharia there. It appears to be a case of "give them an inch; they take a yard." The leader of the main opposition party said: "The last few days show that gun-carrying Taliban are spreading to more areas and eventually want to capture the whole of Pakistan." Yikes! And Clinton would agree. She said the Pakistani government, in signing the deal, was "basically abdicating to the Taliban and the extremists."

In another bold move, when Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) asked Clinton about former Vice President Dick Cheney's effort to declassify documents he says prove the "success" of harsh interrogation techniques, Madame Secretary had this zinger:

Well, it will not surprise you that I do not consider him a particularly reliable source of information.

Clinton seems to be displaying the controlled and competent essence of her "newly launched" fragrance line, Authorité.

Photo: Brendan Smialowski/Getty Images