|
Hillary Clinton on Foreign PolicyDemocratic Jr Senator (NY) |
A: We currently still have more leverage, but it doesn't really count because we're not using it. We have handicapped ourselves because of Bush's irresponsible fiscal policies, but we've also, unfortunately, seen an incoherent foreign policy. I fear that if we don't start taking steps to demonstrate that we are back in charge of our fiscal destiny, that we do have a coherent diplomatic approach toward China, China will continue to gain leverage over us.
A: It will be a doctrine of restoring America's leadership and moral authority through multilateral organizations, through attempts to come to agreements on issues ranging from global warming to stopping the proliferation of nuclear weapons and other dangerous weapons. It will be a doctrine that demonstrates that the United States is not afraid to cooperate; that through cooperation in our interdependent world, we actually can build a stronger country and a stronger world that will be more reflective of our values.
A: You know, 12 years ago, I went to China, and the Chinese didn't want me to come. And they didn't want me to make a speech, and when I made the speech, they blocked it out from being heard within China, where I stood up for human rights and in particular women's rights, because women had been so brutally abused in many settings in China. And I think you do have to call them on human rights. I mean, the Chinese respect us if we actually call them on their misbehavior and their breaches of human rights, economic activities and other kinds of problems that we have with them. That's what I object to about this administration. We've gotten the worst of both worlds. We've gotten neither the kind of smart enforcement nor the kind of cooperation that might lead to changes in behavior.
A: I certainly did. I not only advised; I often met with he and his advisers, both in preparation for, during and after. I traveled with representatives from the Security Council, the State Department, occasionally the Defense Department, and even the CIA. So I was deeply involved in being part of the Clinton team in the first Clinton administration. And I am someone who want the best possible advice from as many different sources as possible, and that would certainly include my husband.
Most of what Clinton said is true. The Chinese certainly weren't eager for her speech to be widely heard. They blacked it out, allowing just 5,000 carefully selected Party members to hear it. From their perspective, they may have been right to do so. She was critical of China's human rights record in general, especially its treatment of women. Republicans and Democrats alike praised the tough tone of her speech.
But contrary to Clinton's claim, the Chinese very much wanted her to come; she was considered a prize catch. The government even released an American, human rights activist Harry Wu, whom they had convicted of espionage, at least in part as a good faith gesture to convince Clinton to attend the event.
A: The Cuban people deserve freedom and democracy, and we're all hopeful that that can be brought about peacefully. It appears as though the reign of Castro is reaching an end. We don't know what will follow Fidel Castro, but we need to do everything we can to work with our friends in Latin America who are democratic nations, with the Europeans and others, to try to bring about a peaceful transition to democracy and freedom for the Cuban people. Now, that requires that we work with the entire hemisphere. You know, in 1994 I remember being here in Miami when my husband hosted the Summit of the Americas. At that time, there was only one anti-democratic, anti-American leader in the hemisphere, namely Castro. Look at what we face today because of the misguided, bullying policies of this president. So let's reverse it and get ready for freedom in Cuba!
CLINTON: I'm running on my own qualifications and experience. It's really up to the voters to make these decisions. I think we have a great group of candidates. You don't have to be against anybody. You can choose who you're for.
Q: But you did say that Sen. Obama's views on meeting with foreign dictators are "naive and irresponsible." Doesn't that imply that he's not ready for the office?
CLINTON: Well, we had a specific disagreement, because I do not think that a president should give away the bargaining chip of a personal meeting with any leader, unless you know what you're going to get out of that. It takes a lot of planning to move an agenda forward, particularly with our adversaries. You should not telegraph to our adversaries that you're willing to meet with them without preconditions during the first year in office.
OBAMA: Strong countries and strong presidents meet and talk with our adversaries. We shouldn't be afraid to do so.
BIDEN: They're neither. The fact of the matter is, though, they hold the mortgage on our house. This administration, in order to fund a war that shouldn't be being fought and tax cuts that weren't needed--we're now in debt almost a trillion dollars to China.
CLINTON: I want to say amen to Joe Biden, because he's 100% right. You know, 6 years ago, we had a balanced budget and a surplus; now we are in deep debt with a rising deficit, and it is absolutely true that George Bush has put it on the credit card, expecting our children and grandchildren to pay for it. We've got to get back to fiscal responsibility in order to undercut the Chinese power over us because of the debt we hold. We also have to deal with their currency manipulation. We have to have tougher standards on what they import into this country. I do not want to eat bad food from China or have my children having toys that are going to get them sick. So let's be tougher on China going forward.
A: I agree completely that what we need to do is start acting instead of talking. That means accelerating the UN peacekeeping forces along with the African Union. It means moving more quickly on divestment and sanctions on the Sudanese government, including trying to use the diplomacy to get China involved. And, finally, it does mean a no-fly zone. We can do it in a way that doesn't endanger humanitarian relief.
Q: How about American troops on the ground?
A: I think NATO has to be there with the no-fly zone, and I think that only the US can provide the logistical support and the air lift to make a no-fly zone and the actual delivery of humanitarian aid work.
Q: Does that mean no American ground troops?
A: American ground troops I don't think belong in Darfur at this time. I think we need to focus on the UN peacekeeping troops and the African Union troops.
A: You know, when I was First Lady, I was privileged to represent our country in 82 countries. I have met with many officials in Arabic and Muslim countries. I have met with kings and presidents and prime ministers and sheiks and tribal leaders. And certainly, in the last years during my time in the Senate, I have had many high-level meetings with presidents and prime ministers in Iraq, Afghanistan, Kuwait, Pakistan and many other countries. I believe that there isn't much doubt in anyone's mind that I can be taken seriously. Other countries have had women presidents and women prime ministers. There are several serving now--in Germany, in Chile, in Liberia and elsewhere--and I have noticed that their compatriots on the world stage certainly take them seriously.
OBAMA: I would. The notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them is ridiculous. I think that it is a disgrace that we have not spoken to them.
CLINTON: I will not promise to meet with the leaders of these countries during my first year. I will promise a very vigorous diplomatic effort but not a high level meeting before you know what the intentions are. I don't want to be used for propaganda purposes. But I certainly agree that we need to get back to diplomacy, which has been turned into a bad word by this administration. I will use a lot of high-level presidential envoys to test the waters, to feel the way. But certainly, we're not going to just have our president meet with Fidel Castro & Hugo Chavez & the president of North Korea, Iran & Syria until we know better what the way forward would be.
In contrast to the anti-Israel version of Hillary portrayed during parts of the 1970s, some sources claim this trip gave Hillary an inspired appreciation for the state of Israel, and if so, it may have mitigated her alleged pro-PLO sympathies, giving more balance in her perspective. A friend of the Clintons says: "Bill and Hillary understood the profound effect that Israel has on American Jews and around the world and share a feeling for the security and stability of the State of Israel."
A: There are three things we have to do immediately. Move the peacekeepers--that, finally, the United Nations and the African Union have agreed to--into Sudan as soon as possible. In order for them to be effective, there has to be airlift and logistical support, and that can only come either unilaterally from the United States or from NATO. I prefer NATO. And finally, we should have a no-fly zone over Sudan because the Sudanese governments bomb the villages before and after the Janjiwid come. And we should make it very clear to the government in Khartoum we're putting up a no-fly zone; if they fly into it, we will shoot down their planes. Is the only way to get their attention.
Several months later, while attending a meeting of the Palestinian National Council, Hillary praised Yasser Arafat's leadership and again called for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.
In 1999, while traveling in the Middle East, Hillary had a joint appearance with Yasser Arafat's wife, Suha. Ms. Arafat took the occasion to accuse Israel of poisoning her people. It was an outlandish accusation, but it did not stop Hillary from giving Suha a kiss when she finished talking.
Roll forward 8 months. Hillary, now a candidate for the Senate, called for moving the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, "the eternal & indivisible capital of Israel."
And while aligning herself with her husband on many issues, she called for a broader foreign policy mandate that, for instance, considers disease fighting a national security issue and deems the rights of women a priority. “I think it has become increasingly clear that our efforts to ensure democracy and human rights cannot be considered marginal but are indeed central to our foreign policy objectives this century,” Mrs. Clinton said.
[At the conference], the First Lady lambasted China’s Communist government for suppressing free speech and the right to assemble at the grassroots women’s forum [of the UN Conference]. She inspired the women there to make their voices heard against selling girls into prostitution, against rape as a tactic of war, against forced abortion or sterilization. “Human rights are women’s rights. And women’s rights are human rights, once and for all.”