The Hillary Doctrine

In the latest release of Forbes magazine’s list of the world’s 100 most powerful women, the German prime minister Angela Merkel reclaimed – for the fourth time – the number one spot, while Secretary of State Hillary Clinton only managed to take 36th place.

Some believe that because she did not succeed in claiming the Democratic candidacy for president, her influence has experienced a definite set back. Yet, at the same time, it would appear that in the half-year’s time since she took office [as secretary of state] there has been the gradual emergence of what is being called the “Hillary doctrine.”

The Hillary doctrine, naturally, is not the same as the Monroe doctrine. The latter used his presidency to declare to Europe that the continent of America belongs to the powers within its region, while the Hillary doctrine is based on Hillary’s formulation and execution of foreign policy under the leadership of President Obama. And no one would deny that U.S. foreign policy has some of Hillary’s own flavor in it.

While they were still campaigning, Hillary once criticized Obama’s concept of foreign politics, calling it too “naive” (Obama once said that if he became president he would hold talks with Iran and North Korea without preconditions). Yet, now the difference between Hillary and Obama is scarce, to say the least. Hillary’s current position is “no need to differentiate between friend and foe, it is always better to make contact.” With these two words – “make contact” – one already sees a clear distinction between her and Bush’s foreign policy game plan (Bush once called Iran, North Korea and Cuba the “Axis of Evil” and refused to communicate with them).

As for relations with Russia, Hillary expects cooperation and effort put toward the target of eliminating nuclear weapons, and would appreciate that they do not get involved in the effort to compel Iran to give up pursuit of nuclear capabilities. And even though Vice President Biden recently made statements praising the induction of Ukraine and Georgia into NATO, it is possible that their political actions will reveal that they do not intend to overstep their bounds on the issue.

Hillary will not be singing loudly for human rights in China, as the U.S. will be needing China’s intimate cooperation to tackle the issues of the financial crisis, global warming and North Korea. It is very certain that while Hillary is visiting China she will not be there promoting a democratic and/or human rights agenda.

The Middle East is still at the center of U.S. foreign policy. Hillary advocates fighting for support from Syria, finding a solution to the Iranian nuclear issue and resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Her aim is to use foreign policy methods to try to get Syria to take a new approach towards profiting their nation. The U.S. hopes that Syria will lock down their border with Iraq, stop their involvement with Lebanese internal politics, make peace with Israel and sever ties with Iran.

These are the main ideas of the Hillary doctrine; it could also be said that they make up the main engine that drives U.S. foreign policy. Yet Hillary is by no means enjoying her appointment to secretary of state free of certain vexations. On the first day of her 11-day trip to Africa where she would be visiting seven countries, the newspaper headlines were not reading “Hillary is in Kenya” but rather “Clinton is in North Korea.” And it was this arrangement that expressed clearly that her influence is far from being strictly her own.

Another interesting phenomenon is that while Obama was attending the financial summit and visiting Russia, Hillary did not accompany him. The reason was that she had injured her elbow. Consequently it was said that “Obama took off the bandages for Hillary.” Yet in actuality, Hillary took off her own bandages before her trip to Africa.

After Obama had finished with the financial summit, he turned his attention to a Middle Eastern issue, namely how to relieve tension between the two major cultures of Christianity and Islam – putting forth his own “Cairo Declaration” and extending an olive branch to the Muslim world. More recently he transferred a U.S. state department expert on the Iran issue to the White House to act as an advisor to the president. Among the issues of concern in the Middle East, Iran is special, and therefore it remains in the realm of the president’s own territory.

While visiting Europe, Biden promoted the expansion of NATO, and during his recent visits to Ukraine and Georgia he reaffirmed his support toward these two close neighbors of Russia. During this time he spoke with a voice that seemed to overshadow the office of the secretary of state. In retrospect, looking at Hillary’s trip to Asia shortly after being appointed, as well as her trip to Africa, it looks as though U.S. foreign policy is barely operating as a trio. And basically, that is what is meant by the term the “Hillary doctrine.”