Today Secretary Clinton released the State Department's first-ever Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR), which as my colleague Josh Rogin over at The Cable notes, is "meant to chart a way forward for the diplomatic corps to play a greater role in U.S. foreign policy in a world of shrinking budgets and resources."

Here are a couple of Clinton quotes from Rogin's report:

"As you dig in to this report, you'll see it's driven by two overarching factors, first is president Obama's focus on fiscal responsibility and efficiency throughout the federal government," Clinton said. "Through the QDDR, we have tried to minimize costs, maximize impacts, avoid overlap and duplication and focus on delivering results."

"Across our programs we are redefining success based on results achieved rather than dollars spent," she said. "This will help us make the case that bolstering U.S. civilian power is a wise investment for American taxpayers that will pay off by averting conflicts, opening markets, and reducing threats."

The video of Clinton's speech is below. The transcript is here.

Speaking a short time before she learned of Ambassador Richard Holbrooke's death yesterday evening, Secretary Clinton recalled him as a "giant of the diplomatic corps for almost 50 years" and said he was "practically synonymous with American foreign policy of that time period." She joked, "He's a fierce negotiator. I'm sure there are some shoulders here tonight that are still a little bit sore from his arm-twisting." Clinton made the remarks (in their entirety below) while greeting a holiday reception for chiefs of diplomatic missions to the United States.

Upon learning of Holbrooke's death later in the evening, Clinton gathered at George Washington University Hospital with dozens of other State Department officials as well as current and former Holbrooke aides, according to Laura Rozen over at Politico. Rozen wrote late yesterday night:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and about forty senior State Department officials, and Holbrooke aides past and present spontaneously gathered at George Washington Hospital tonight when they heard the news that the veteran diplomat had died, and later shut down a nearby hotel reminiscing about him.

…

Secretary Clinton "was incredible," the official continued. "She pulled everyone together." 

Clinton's complete remarks about Holbrooke from yesterday's reception, made before learning of his death:

He is practically synonymous with American foreign policy of that time period. He's taken on the hardest assignments, from Vietnam to the Balkans to Afghanistan and Pakistan. And this week, his doctors are learning what diplomats and dictators around the world have long known: There's nobody tougher than Richard Holbrooke. He's a fierce negotiator. I'm sure there are some shoulders here tonight that are still a little bit sore from his arm-twisting.

But he is a fiercer friend and a beloved mentor and an invaluable counselor. He has been a friend of mine for many years and I am deeply grateful for his presence and support. When I came to the State Department, I was delighted to be able to bring Richard in and give him one of the most difficult challenges that any diplomat can face. And he immediately put together an absolutely world class staff. It represents what we believe should be the organizational model for the future - people not only from throughout our own government, but even representatives from other governments all working together. And we know that with Richard, loyalty runs deep and it runs both ways. So tonight, our thoughts and prayers are with Ambassador Holbrooke, his wife Kati, their family, who are here with us as well.

Only Secretary Clinton is singled out for praise by Gen. Stanley McChrystal's officials in the Rolling Stone profile on the U.S. commander of NATO-led forces in Afghanistan. In the article, McChrystal's aides call James L. Jones, the national security advisor, a "clown" who is "stuck in 1985" and refer to Richard Holbrooke, the U.S. envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, as a "wounded animal." McChrystal, seen in the background of the Nov. 19, 2009, photo above, has apologized for the dismissive remarks about senior Obama administration officials. 

The Wall Street Journal's Washington Wire blog states:

Only Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who is portrayed as having strongly backed McChrystal's plan for Afghanistan, is singled out for praise by the anonymous McChrystal aides. 

The Guardian states:

The article lists administration figures said to back McChrystal, including defence secretary Robert Gates and secretary of state Hillary Clinton.

McClatchy states:

Only Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gets good reviews from McChrystal's staff.

Seems like McChrystal's team is like the general American public in giving Clinton the highest rating among senior U.S. leaders.

Just last Friday, Clinton, in a news conference with the Danish foreign minister, made positive comments about progress in Afghanistan:

So we think that we're making progress. We know how hard it is. The Afghan military and police are improving, and we are working hard to provide the trainers and mentoring that they need. We are looking to see more results from some of the governmental reforms that we're expecting. But it is just not true that we haven't seen positive accomplishments. If you look at a lot of the indicators on education, on health, on government capacity, on agricultural output, on economic growth, on a revenue base for the country to function, there's a lot of positive indicators.

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. 

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

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.

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

As The Cable just reported, Clinton's itinerary for her first official trip overseas has just been announced. From Reuters:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will visit Japan, Indonesia, South Korea and China February 15-22 to discuss issues including the global financial crisis and climate change, the State Department said on Thursday.

"In all capitals, the secretary will be discussing common approaches to the challenges facing the international community, including the financial markets turmoil, humanitarian issues, security and climate change," State Department spokesman Robert Wood told reporters.

Secretary Clinton held a very interesting Town Hall meeting today with State Department employees. The Q&A session covered a great deal of ground - the role of special envoys, the relationship between State and Defense, and benefits for same-sex partners working in war zones - and Hillary had great responses on the whole and was fast with a quip, joking about food in the cafeteria and how she "sometimes totally forget[s]" having run for president. 

But her response about private military contractors surprised me - and contradicts her past positions. On the presidential campaign trail, Clinton was vehement in her opposition to using private military contractors in Iraq. And last February, she was the sole cosponsor in the Senate of a bill that would require the Secretary of State to ban all use of military contractors in protecting State Dept. employees. According to the bill,

Not later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of State shall ensure that all personnel at any United States diplomatic or consular mission in Iraq are provided security services only by Federal Government personnel.

But today at the Town Hall meeting, she backpedaled:

QUESTION: Good afternoon, Madame Secretary. My name is Chris Dilworth. I’m an intern from Indiana University. I’m interning in the Bureau of Human Resources, Department of Resource Management and Organizational Analysis. My question is a quick one. Will you ban private military contracts?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, we have, as you know, expressed a lot of concern about private security contracts. The Department ended the Blackwater contract in Iraq. But here’s the dilemma, and take Iraq as the example. We are going to be withdrawing our troops. Now, the President’s working right now on how to sequence the withdrawal and how to do so in as safe and effective manner as possible. We believe there will be an important role for our civilian employees.

How we provide security and safety for those performing civilian functions is a very difficult question. The military assets will be diminishing. The numbers of civilians in Iraq, to go back to Steve’s question, will also be decreasing. But there will be a corps of, you know, Foreign Service and Civil Service and foreign nationals who will be performing the work of the United States of America. And I, for one, as your Secretary, want to make sure that they have necessary security.

So we’re working that out. This is one of the issues on a long list of issues about Iraq, Afghanistan, and other places. I certainly am of the mind that we should, insofar as possible, diminish our reliance on private security contractors. Whether we can go all the way to banning, under current circumstances, seems unlikely, but we ought to be engaged in a very careful review of where they should and shouldn’t be used, and under what circumstances. And that’s what we’re doing right now.

As senator, Hillary accused outfits such as Blackwater as having "compromised our mission in Iraq" and "endangered U.S. lives." Her new vantage has apparently softened that stance? 

And for the comments: Do you think the State Department should use private military companies to protect its employees overseas?

Patrick Baz/AFP/Getty Images

Secretary Clinton has inherited many headaches from her predecessor (and her predecessor's boss), but while most of them concern foreign shores, at least one is far closer to home. According to a number of recent reports, the Office of the Historian at the State Department is in serious disarray.

Now, before you even ask whether this bears any relevance whatsoever to the workings of the State Department or to Sec. Clinton, let's be clear: It absolutely does. The Office of the Historian is in charge of publishing the Foreign Relations of the United States (FRUS), a documentary series first started under Abraham Lincoln that features declassified government documents - from State, Defense, NSC, CIA, and other government agencies - relating to how U.S. foreign policy is made. It's the first stop for researchers, journalists, historians, and ordinary citizens wanting to know the secrets to how the sausage is made. Want to see the minutes from Oval Office meetings on the Iraq war circa March 2003? Check the FRUS in a few decades' time.

And from the recent reports (and through no fault of her own, commenters), it sounds as though Sec. Clinton has inherited something of a hornet's nest. In December, the chairman of the watchdog committee overseeing the series resigned in protest, citing mismanagment of the FRUS. William Roger Lewis, a former president of the American Historical Association, said in his resignation letter to Condoleezza Rice:

The Historian’s Office has become an intolerable place to work; the exodus of experienced historians is significant; and the future of the Foreign Relations series is at risk. [...] At the present rate of attrition, the Foreign Relations series faces as grave a crisis as at any time in its history.

The reported disorder in the Historian's office is causing the publication of declassified materials to fall behind schedule by several years. How is this any of Clinton's problem? It's up to the Secretary to make sure the series is published on time. Secretary Rice met with members of the Advisory Committee just before she left State, and an outside report was prepared in an attempt to solve the office's issues. It was released just days before Obama took office, and there's worry that its critical recommendations might have gotten lost in the shuffle of the new administration. It need not necessarily be at the top of her to-do list, but support from Secretary Clinton early on in her tenure could get this critical resource back on track. 

Thanks to reader BB for the tip.

A high-ranking Japanese official has told the Asahi Shimbun that Hillary Clinton's first visit overseas will be to Japan and that she might visit the country as soon as mid-February, the first leg on a larger Asian tour.

The choice of Japan as the first leg on Clinton's Asia tour, which is expected to include China and South Korea, is seen as an indication of the importance the Obama administration puts on its relationship with Tokyo.

The trip could help dispel concerns in Japan that the new administration intends to place a greater importance on relations with Beijing than with Tokyo.

Clinton's schedule is subject to change, depending on world developments.

During the visit, Clinton is expected to reconfirm the importance of the Japan-U.S. alliance and discuss the global financial crisis and regional issues, including North Korea, with Japanese leaders.

Officials in Tokyo apparently would feel obliged to come out with additional help to stabilize Afghanistan. During the presidential campaign, Obama vowed to ramp up the U.S. effort in Afghanistan as part of the war on terror.

Clinton is also expected to take part in intensive discussions on North Korea's nuclear program during her East Asia tour.

The State Department's U.S. Global AIDS Coordinator and director of the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) position was unexpectedly vacated last week by its incumbent, Dr. Mark R. Dybul. Dybul initially told colleagues on January 9th that he had been asked to stay for several months; the day after Hillary Clinton was confirmed, she announced that he had resigned, though he's reportedly told friends he was asked to leave.

Michael Gerson wrote an op-ed on Wednesday criticizing the move, calling Dybul "almost universally respected among legislators, AIDS activists, foreign leaders and health experts." But it's not just conservative op-ed writers who are concerned; PEPFAR is one of the few things many health and development experts believe the Bush administration got right. The Times reports that nearly 70 anti-AIDS groups sent Clinton a letter this week asking for a delay in naming a successor and for a more open process in deciding on the next chief.

State Department spokesman Robert Wood was quizzed today about Dybul's sudden departure.

QUESTION: On Mark Dybul. Mr. Wood, The Washington Post reported January 28^th that the day after the inauguration of President Barack Obama, your Global Coordinator on HIV/AIDS, Ambassador Mark Dybul, quote, “received a call asking him to submit his resignation and leave by the end of the day his office,” unquote. I am wondering why and what happened.

MR. WOOD: Well, very simple.

QUESTION: Excuse me?

MR. WOOD: It’s very simple. I’m going to explain.As you know, at the end of an administration, on January 20, officials who are political appointees are required to submit their resignations and depart. And that’s all that was. It was for not just Mr. Dybul but other, you know, officials from the Bush Administration. They are required to submit their resignations and to depart. That was a part of it.

Senator John Kerry (D-Massachusetts) reportedly approached Clinton recently to recommend Harvard professor and former WHO AIDS chief Dr. Jim Yong Kim for the position, only to be told that Clinton had already offered it to Dr. Eric Goosby, who led AIDS initiatives for the Clinton administration. Goosby refused to comment, according to the Times.

But of course, we’re concerned about the humanitarian suffering. We’re concerned any time innocent civilians, Palestinian or Israeli, are attacked. That’s why we support Israel’s right to self-defense. The rocket barrages, which are getting closer and closer to populated areas, cannot go unanswered. And it’s, you know, regrettable that the Hamas leadership apparently believes that it is in their interest to provoke the right of self-defense instead of building a better future for the people of Gaza.

For all you Hillary newshounds, here's your Monday round-up.

• Hillary Clinton is not expected to hit Davos this year, though the State Department does plan to be represented. It's actually probably a smart idea that her first trip abroad in the midst of two military conflicts, a crisis in Israel, and a worldwide financial crisis is not to a ski resort to be photographed with Angelina Jolie.
• She attended a mid-afternoon huddle with Barack Obama and new Middle East envoy George Mitchell (who would have thought we would envy George Mitchell?) to discuss Mitchell's upcoming mission to Cairo, Jerusalem, Ramallah, Amman, Riyadh, Paris, and London. Mitchell leaves tonight. 
• Journalist Bernard Goldberg, whose latest tome catsigating the media for its liberal bias is set to be published by a conservative publishing house, has an interview out in which he blames the media (and not the 18 million-plus-one 17.5 milion voters (updated: thanks for all the comments and corrections on that point! didn't mean it literally, but should have made that clear) that voted for the other guy in the primaries) for Clinton not being president: 

  She's the biggest single loser in all of this. If the media had done its job early on, Hillary Clinton would have been the nominee for president of the United States and probably elected president of the United States.

Not the sexism in the media, mind you, its liberal bias. Sexism is a thing of the past, obviously.

• In more interesting interviews, Madeleine Albright granted one to National Journal's Amy Harderin which she talked about the way Hillary is viewed by the rest of the world and the ways that cooperating with your former rival helps with the perception of American in the world.

First of all, I think she herself is a known quantity abroad. When I was secretary and she was first lady, it was very evident that she had quite a large and resounding international role. She was identified with human rights and women's rights and generally showing a very positive side of America. I think she is so well-known abroad, and having somebody that is that well-known is very important. The other part is something that I think is essential, and that is that it is showing what democratic elections are like in the U.S. -- you argue and you run against each other, but you are capable of developing a partnership.

This is similar to what Feminist Majority Foundation President Eleanor Smeal told me last week, actually. Albright also had praise for Clinton and "smart power," which was maligned by Fox News last week.

What she said [Thursday], which I thought was very interesting, is that national security policy is like a three-legged stool -- there's defense, there's diplomacy and there's development, and the State Department is basically responsible for two of those three. I would advise her to really make that a very central part of what she does -- is to make sure people understand that smart power, which she talked about a lot, is the way to show the best side of America.