Hillary Clinton on Foreign Policy Secretary of State; previously Democratic Senator (NY)

Sub-sections under Foreign Policy:
• China
• Latin America
• Middle East
• Political Hotspots
• Voting Record
• Other issues under Foreign Policy

Clinton Foundation raised $30M to help Haiti

For long-term US policy against nuclear proliferation

Clinton: Donald has said he didn't care if other nations got nuclear weapons, Japan, South Korea, even Saudi Arabia. It has been the policy of the US to do everything we could to reduce the proliferation of nuclear weapons. His cavalier attitude about nuclear weapons is deeply troubling. That is the number-one threat we face. It becomes particularly threatening if terrorists ever get their hands on any nuclear material. A man who can be provoked by a tweet should not have his fingers anywhere near the nuclear codes.

Trump is a unilateralist vs. Hillary's multilateralist hawk

• Green Energy: Hillary favors investment in renewable energy as a means to address climate change; Trump does not.
• Multilateralism: Hillary accepts the current framework of American engagement with allies around the world; Trump would re-negotiate most of them (but he is not an isolationist, like some Republicans who reject the current international framework).
• Mideast intervention: Hillary favors keeping America engaged militarily, while Trump opposes most military action, especially in the Middle East. This reverses the standard party positions: Hillary is more hawkish than Trump.

Obama trusted my judgment; I'll be ready on Day One

If the US does not lead, there is a vacuum

O'MALLEY: I believe that we need to focus on destroying ISIL. But we shouldn't be the ones declaring that Assad must go. Where did it ever say in the Constitution, that it's the job of the U.S. to determine when dictators have to go?

CLINTON: Assad has killed, by last count, about 250,000 Syrians. The reason we are in the mess we're in, that ISIS has the territory it has, is because of Assad. We now finally have a strategy and a commitment to go after ISIS. And we finally have a U.N. Security Council Resolution bringing the world together to go after a political transition in Syria. If the United States does not lead, there is not another leader. There is a vacuum. And we have to lead, if we're going to be successful.

SANDERS: Of course the United States must lead. But the US is not the policeman of the world. The US must not be involved in perpetual warfare in the Middle East.

Some world leaders are still misogynistic

"Is it difficult to deal with misogynistic leaders around the world?"

I responded that I would guess that many leaders choose to ignore the fact that they're dealing with a woman when they're dealing with me. But I try not to let them get away with that. (Nonetheless, it is an unfortunate reality that women in public life still face an unfair double standard. Even leaders like former Prime Minister Julia Gillard of Australia have faced outrageous sexism, which shouldn't be tolerated in any country.)

Idealistic realism: embody hybrid rather than categorizing

There are times when we do have to make difficult compromises. Our challenge is to be clear-eyed about the world as it is while never losing sight of the world as we want it to become. That's why I don't mind that I've been called both an idealist & a realist over the years. I prefer being considered a hybrid, perhaps an idealistic realist. Because I, like our country, embody both tendencies.

2009: Chose Japan as first destination to emphasize alliance

In those days there were legitimate concerns about America's economic future. [But by our visit in] summer 1993, we could already see that America was regaining its economic strength. Japan, by contrast, faced a "Lost Decade" after its assets and credit bubble burst, leaving banks and other businesses loaded down with bad debt. Its economy, once feared by Americans, slowed to an anemic pace--which caused a whole different set of concerns for them and us. Japan was still one of the largest economies in the world and a key partner in responding to the global financial crisis. I chose Tokyo as my first destination to underscore that our new administration saw the alliance as a cornerstone of our strategy in the region.

Smart power: combine civil society & traditional diplomacy

Does US still have what it takes to lead? Yes!

And it will be--so long as we stay true to our values and remember that, before we are Republicans or Democrats, liberals or conservatives, or any of the other labels that divide us as often as define us, we are Americans, all with a personal stake in our country.

Distinguish inherited problems from new ones & opportunities

"Smart power" combines diplomacy and development

America is the "indispensable nation"

But the words didn't originate with them, either. In a 1976 article in "Foreign Policy," Zbigniew Brzezinski wrote of "America the indispensible." Despite its defeat in Vietnam, he argued, American power remains "central to global stability and progress." During that period, Brzezinski argued that the US should start to give a much higher priority to its relationship with its allies.

Ceremonial role abroad as First Lady, but no NSC meetings

Later on, during the presidential campaign against Obama, Hillary Clinton would assert that these efforts demonstrated her experience in foreign policy. But [one of Bill Clinton's appointees from the] State Department said, "she did not sit in on National Security Council meetings. She did not have a security clearance. She did not manage any part of the national security bureaucracy, nor did she have her own national security staff. She did not do any heavy lifting with foreign governments, whether they were friendly or not." Her most tangible influence in foreign policy was in selecting personnel: She played an important role in persuading President Clinton to select Madeleine Albright as his second secretary of state.

New American Moment: new ways of global leadership

Clinton began by saying that the world's problems required bringing people together "as only America can." Foreign leaders and ordinary people overseas "look to America not just to engage, but to lead," she said. Then she quickly came to the heart of her speech: "Let me say it clearly: The US can, must and will lead in this new century."

This was a "New American Moment," Clinton said, the words capitalized in the transcript of the speech to indicate a special phrase meant to be highlighted. It was "a moment when our global leadership is essential, even if we must often lead in new ways." When she extolled the virtues of diplomacy, she immediately added, "Of course, this administration is also committed to maintaining the greatest military in the history of the world, and, if needed, to vigorously defend ourselves and our friends."

1% of budget on foreign aid maintains our global leadership

"The 1% of our budget we spend on all diplomacy and development is not what is driving our deficit. Not only can we afford to maintain a strong civilian presence, we cannot afford not to. The simple truth is, if we don't seize the opportunities available today, other countries will; other countries will fight for their companies while ours fend for themselves. Other countries will promote their own models and serve their own interests, instead of opening markets, reinforcing the rule of law and creating widespread inclusive growth. Other countries will create the jobs that should be created here, and even claim the mantle of global leadership."

Clinton cited the Marshall Plan [in post-WWII] Europe, which established a long-term economic partnership with the US that now grosses $250 billion annually.

2009: Regrets US not part of International Criminal Court

To date, the ICC has proceeded slowly, partly in the hope of enticing the US to cooperate with it, and the Bush administration succumbed to it in its final years. The ICC's friends under President Obama want to go even further. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in 2009, for example, that it was "a great regret but it is a fact we are not yet a signatory" to the Rome Statute, signaling unmistakably what she hopes to do.

The Obama administration's willingness to submit US conduct to international judicial review also extends to the concept of "universal jurisdiction," which permits even countries utterly unrelated to an event to initiate criminal prosecutions regarding it.

Commit to helping people abroad before committing troops

A: I believe strongly that we have to get back to leading on issues like health care and education and women’s rights around the world. I have introduced bipartisan legislation called The Education for Al Act, to have the US lead the world in putting the 77 million kids who aren’t in school into school. I believe we should demonstrate our commitment to people who are poor, disenfranchised, disempowered before we talk about putting troops anywhere. The US has to be seen again as a peacekeeper, and we have lost that standing in these last seven years. So I think we have to concentrate first and foremost on restoring our moral authority in the world and our standing in the world.

Establish leadership & moral authority via multilateralism

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.

Operate from a position of strength, but not confrontation

A: No, absolutely not. It would be a position where we would operate from strength with a coherent policy about what our interests were and what we hope to achieve.

Supported strong funding for international development

Should not telegraph our adversaries about preconditions

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.

Diplomacy yes; propaganda no; when meeting enemy leaders

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.

More cautiously internationalist than Bill Clinton

But for the current senator, much of this apparently seems dubious, at least as a road map to the future. "We just can't keep doing what we did in the twentieth century," she said, adding that we may need "a little time-out" before the enactment of any further trade deals. Accordingly, in 2005, she voted against CAFTA, and she has even repeatedly spouted skepticism about the wisdom of NAFTA--while stopping short of blaming her husband for its deficiencies: "I believe in the general principles NAFTA represented, but what we have learned is that we have to drive a tougher bargain."

Support UN reform because US benefits

"The U.S. benefits from a stronger, more effective U.N. As the founding nation, the host nation, and the largest contributor, the United States has far more to gain that to lose by insisting on reform, transparency, and performance. In the humanitarian and peacekeeping fields, we pay roughly one quarter of the overall costs, and we pay 22 percent of the regular budget. Thus, if the UN is effective, our investment if highly leveraged. If it is weak, our money--along with yours--is worth less, and more of the burden will fall directly on us, the richer nations represented here today. Thus, I fully support the Secretary General's reform efforts, and urge him to do even more."

Supports USAID projects in developing world

Source: Living History, by Hillary Rodham Clinton, p.268-270 , Nov 1, 2003

Focus on women's rights in international policy

Typically, governments limit their foreign policies to diplomatic, military and trade issues, the staple of most treaties, pacts and negotiations. Seldom are issues such as women's health, the education of girls, the absence of women's legal and political rights or their economic isolation injected into the foreign policy debate. Yet it was clear to me that in the new global economy, individual countries and regions would find it difficult to make economic or social progress if a disproportionate percentage of their female population remained poor, uneducated, unhealthy, and disenfranchised.

The UN women's conference was expected to provide an important forum for nations to address issues such as maternal and child health care, microfinance, domestic violence, girls' education, family planning, women's suffrage, property and legal rights.

Engage in world affairs, including human rights

Human rights are central to our objectives abroad

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.

Smartest strategic choice is peace

Foreign aid spending is only 1%; lead by remaining engaged

Supports micro-loans to third-world women

China never fits neatly into category like friend or rival

[In my 1998 China trip as First Lady], I came home from the trip convinced that if China over time embraces reform and modernization, it could become a constructive world power and an important partner for the US.

I returned to China as Secretary in February 2009 with the goal of building a relationship durable enough to weather the inevitable disputes and crises that would arise. I also wanted to embed the China relationship in our broader Asia strategy, engaging Beijing in the region's multilateral institutions [based on] agreed-upon rules. [But] we would not sacrifice our values or our traditional allies in order to win better terms with China.

Get China involved with North Korea diplomacy

In my public remarks [in Feb. 2009] in Seoul I extended an invitation to the North Koreans. If they would completely and verifiably eliminate their nuclear weapons program, we would be willing to normalize relations, and assist in meeting the economic and humanitarian needs of the North Korean people. If not, the regime's isolation would continue. It was an opening gambit that was not one I thought likely to succeed. But we started off with the offer of engagement knowing it would be easier to get other nations to pressure North Korea if and when the offer was rejected. It was particularly important for China, a longtime patron and protector of the regime in Pyongyang, to be part of a united international front. [The opening failed, as have numerous others since then].

China never fits neatly into category like friend or rival

[In 1998], I came home from the trip convinced that if China over time embraces reform and modernization, it could become a constructive world power and an important partner for the US. But it was not going to be easy, and America would have to be smart and vigilant in how we engaged this growing nation.

Embed China within broader Asia strategy

Balance American interests between China & Korea

We talked about how to balance America's interests in Asia, which sometimes seemed in competition. For example, how hard could we push the Chinese on human rights or climate change and still gain their support on security issues like Iran and North Korea Q [to Gov. O'Malley]: How many Syrian refugees should the US take in?

O'MALLEY: I was the first person on this stage to say that we should accept the 65,000 Syrian refugees that were fleeing the sort of murder of ISIL, and I believe that that needs to be done with proper screening.

Q: Secretary Clinton, how do you propose we screen those coming in to keep citizens safe?

CLINTON: I think that is the number one requirement. I also said that we should take increased numbers of refugees.

Freedom of navigation & open access in South China Sea

The US was, in effect, rejecting China's claims in the South China Sea. Its suggestion of multilateral talks also undercut China's strategy; Vietnam had most eagerly sought to "internationalize" its dispute with China.

Boycott Olympic ceremony to pressure China on Tibet & Sudan

A: Last week I called on our president to not attend the opening ceremonies of the Olympics [to protest] Beijing government’s actions. [We should push] the Chinese to end the suppression of Tibetans and undermining their culture & religious beliefs, and to get more cooperation with respect to Sudan. But the challenge is, how do we try to influence the Chinese government? I believe we have missed many opportunities during the Bush administration to do so. In fact, I think it’s fair to say our policy toward China is incoherent and that has not been in our strategic interest. So I would urge the president to not attend the opening ceremonies, and let’s see whether the Chinese government responds because that would be a great loss of face and perhaps we would get more cooperation.

Establish coherent diplomatic approach toward China

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.

China respects us if we call them on human rights breaches

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.

FactCheck: Chinese did black out Hillary, but DID invite her

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.

Our fiscal responsibility undercuts Chinese power over us

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.

China: criticized authoritarianism with women & children

[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.”

Talk with dissidents but Castros are dictators

SANDERS: I think we have got to end the embargo. I believe that we should move towards full and normalized political relations with Cuba. I think it will be a good thing for the Cuban people. It will enable them, I think when they see people coming into their country from the United States, move in a more democratic direction, which is what I want to see.

CLINTON: I told the president that I hoped he would be able to move toward diplomatic relations with Cuba. And there are no better ambassadors for freedom, democracy and economic opportunity than Cuban Americans. I'm looking forward to following the president's trip. I think meeting with dissidents is important. The Cuban people deserve be able to move towards democracy where they pick their own leads. Both Castros have to be considered authoritarian and dictatorial because they are not freely chosen by the people. I hope someday there will be leaders who are chosen by the Cuban people.

Give Puerto Rico authority to restructure their debt

SANDERS: When you get to Puerto Rico, there's an issue that we have not talked about. That island is $73 billion in debt and the government is paying interest rates of up to 11 percent. Many of the bonds they are paying off were purchased by vulture capitalists for 30 cents on the dollar. What I have said in talking to the leaders of Puerto Rico, we've got to bring people together. Some of these vulture capitalists are going to have to lose money in this process.

CLINTON: Absolutely. I have been calling for months that the Congress must give authority to Puerto Rico to restructure its debts. Just like it has enabled states and cities to restructure their debt. It's a grave injustice for the Congress to refuse to enact that opportunity within the bankruptcy law. They deserve to be treated as citizens and to be given the opportunity to get back on their feet economically.

Integrate with Latin America but focus on income inequality

A number of Latin American countries, notably Brazil, Mexico, and Chile, had already found success in reducing inequality and lifting people out of poverty. [Some successful policies include] "conditional cash transfer" programs; cooperation on energy and climate change; and on linking different national and regional electrical grids from northern Canada all the way down to the tip of Chile.

End the Cuban embargo; that will shift onus to Castros

Clinton said she told Obama the embargo "wasn't achieving its goals" and "was holding back our broader agenda across Latin America."

"I thought we should shift the onus onto the Castros to explain why they remained undemocratic and abusive," Clinton writes. But President Obama ultimately decided to maintain the economic restrictions, she said.

In 2011, the White House said it would allow students seeking academic credit and churches making religious trips to visit the island. Additionally, the administration expanded the number of US airports permitted to offer charter service to the island.

Focus on BRICs: Brazil, Russia, India, China, & South Africa

Meet with Cuban leaders only after evidence of change

A: The people of Cuba deserve to have a democracy. And this gives the Cuban government, under Raul Castro, a chance to change direction from the one that was set for 50 years by his brother. I’m going to be looking for some of those changes: releasing political prisoner, ending some of the oppressive practices on the press, opening up the economy. Of course the US stands ready. And, as president, I would be ready to reach out and work with a new Cuban government, once it demonstrated that it truly was going to change that direction.

Q: Very simply, would you meet with Raul Castro or not?

A: I would not meet with him until there was evidence that change was happening. A presidential visit should not be offered without some evidence that it will demonstrate the kind of progress that is in our interest, and in this case, in the interests of the Cuban people.

Cuba deserves peaceful transition to freedom & democracy

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!

Keep Cuban embargo; pay UN bills

Should admit carefully vetted war refugees on moral grounds

A: First of all, I will not let anyone into our country that I think poses a risk to us. But there are a lot of refugees, women & children--think of that picture we all saw of that 4-year-old boy with the blood on his forehead because he'd been bombed by the Russian and Syrian air forces. We need to do our part. We by no means are carrying anywhere near the load that Europe and others are. But we will have vetting that is as tough as it needs to be from our intelligence experts and others. It is important for us not to say, as Trump has said, "we're going to ban people based on a religion." We are a country founded on religious freedom and liberty. How do we do what he has advocated without causing great distress within our own country? What he said was extremely unwise and even dangerous. You can look at the propaganda on a lot of the terrorists sites, and what Trump says about Muslims is used to recruit fighters.

Glad the deal took nuclear off the table with Iran

Clinton: It's important that we look at the entire global situation. There's no doubt that we have other problems with Iran. I'd rather deal with the other problems having put that lid on their nuclear program.

We achieved a lot, but not yet normal relations with Iran

CLINTON: I think we have achieved a great deal with the Iranian nuclear agreement. That has to be enforced absolutely with consequences for Iran at the slightest deviation from their requirements under the agreement. I do not think we should promise or even look toward normalizing relations because we have a lot of other business to get done with Iran. Yes, they have to stop being the main state sponsor of terrorism. Yes, they have to stop trying to destabilize the Middle East, causing even more chaos.

We should accept 65,000 Syrian refugees, vetted and screened

O'MALLEY: I was the first person on this stage to say that we should accept the 65,000 Syrian refugees that were fleeing the sort of murder of ISIL, and I believe that that needs to be done with proper screening.

Q: Secretary Clinton, how do you propose we screen those coming in to keep citizens safe?

CLINTON: I think that is the number one requirement. I also said that we should take increased numbers of refugees. The administration originally said 10. I said we should go to 65, but only if we have as careful a screening and vetting process as we can imagine, whatever resources it takes because I do not want us to, in any way, inadvertently allow people who wish us harm to come into our country.

Stand up to Putin's bullying in Syria and elsewhere

CLINTON: We have to stand up to his bullying, and in Syria, it is important to provide safe zones so that people are not going to have to be flooding out of Syria at the rate they are I think it's important that the US make it clear to Putin that it's not acceptable for him to be in Syria bombing people on behalf of Assad, and we can't do that if we don't take more of a leadership position, which is what I'm advocating.

ISIL is more advanced and well-funded than al Qaeda

Clinton backed the strategies of the Obama administration in confronting Islamic State, which is also known as ISIS or ISIL. She described ISIL as not just a major risk to the stability of Middle East, but likely to try attacks on Western targets if given the opportunity.

The remarks came during a friendly interview with Chicago investor and philanthropist J.B. Pritzker who served as national co-chairman of the former first lady's 2008 presidential campaign. While touching on foreign affairs, Mrs. Clinton also weaved in personal stories about her childhood in the Chicago suburb of Park Ridge and her assessment of Congress.

Political restraint against Iran's Ahmadinejad was a mistake

"In retrospect, I'm not sure our restraint was the right choice. It did not stop the regime from ruthlessly crushing the Green Movement, which was exceedingly painful to watch. More strident messages from the United States would probably not have prevented the outcome and might even have hastened it, but there's no way of knowing now if we could have made a difference." (Page 423)

2011: we abandoned Egypt's Mubarak too readily

"Like many other young people around the world, some of President Obama's aides in the White House were swept up in the drama and idealism of the moment as they watched the pictures from Tahrir Square on television. I shared the feeling. It was a thrilling moment. But along with Vice President Biden, Secretary of Defense Bob Gates and National Security Advisor Tom Donilon, I was concerned that we not be seen as pushing a longtime partner out the door, leaving Egypt, Israel, Jordan and the region to an uncertain, dangerous future. (Pages 339-340)

Arab Spring: Egyptian uprising had destabilizing impact

"The President called me to express his unhappiness about the 'mixed messages' we were sending," she writes. "That's a diplomatic way of saying he took me to the woodshed."

There are some other instances throughout the book in which Clinton was in a different place than Obama, but this is the one of the only times in which she describes the president as genuinely unhappy with something that the State Department did.

Work toward Arab Spring not being hijacked by extremists

A: I think that post the Arab revolutions that took place in Egypt and Libya and Tunisia, and elsewhere in the region, there was always going to be a period of adjustment. What we have to work for, along with the international community, is not to see these revolutions hijacked by extremists, not to see the return of dictatorial rule. It's hard going from decades under one party or one man rule, as somebody said, "waking up from a political coma and understanding democracy."

Q: Is President Morsi with us or not? He's said that the Holocaust didn't exist.

A: You have to look at the fact that the people now in power in these countries have never been in government, never had a chance to really learn how to run agencies or to make decisions. We don't condone what a lot of these leaders are doing, or failing to do. But we also know how important it is that we try to avoid even more extreme elements taking control of territory, even threatening a regime.

Afghan women are better off, but we must prevent reversal

A: They're going to have to be given support from their own government and people, as well as the international community.

Q: It's grim for them.

A: For a lot of [Afghan] women, life is much better [than before the US invasion]. Girls are in school who never were before. Women are able to practice their professions and pursue their businesses. So for an increasing group of Afghan women, life is better. Still, there are all kinds of discrimination and difficulties. But for a large group of rural women, life has not changed very much. And what I worry about is that the security situation will keep a total lid on the aspirations and education of the rural women and begin to intimidate and drive out of the public space women who have seen their lives improve. And I think it's incumbent upon us and all the nations that have been in Afghanistan to do everything we can to prevent that from happening.

2007: Traveled to Iraq & Afghanistan before announcement

In the days leading up to her announcement, Clinton traveled to Iraq & Afghanistan, flashing her national security expertise. She began a fund-raising drive that was designed to be a show of overwhelming force.

But, lurking just beneath the machismo, there was a defensiveness to the Clinton strategy. Polling found that Hillary was see by many as unelectable. Her experience as First Lady was discounted and her war vote held against her by the base.

Hillary's rollout was all about addressing these vulnerabilities: "in to win" and the fund-raising push, about electability; the soft-sel video, about her perceived hardness and inauthenticity; the trip to Iraq, about setting the stage for a further leftward shimmy on the war. (On returning, she declared her opposition to the troop surge announced by Bush two weeks earlier.)

2001 speech to AIPAC pledges money for Israeli military

As a senator, however, one of her first major speeches was to AIPAC, the Israeli lobby group where she pledged to work to send more money, not for peacekeeping, or to both sides, but for Israel’s military. (She’s spoken to AIPAC many times since.)

On the fortieth anniversary of the Israeli occupation of West Bank and Gaza, Clinton joined the rest of the Senate in sending a message of congratulations and support to the Israeli government. No encouraging message went to the Palestinians still enduring occupation.

Arabic and Muslim countries take women leaders seriously

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.

Allegedly pro-PLO in 1960; but pro-Israel by 1981

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.”

Supported Palestine in 1998, before Bill officially did

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.”

Obligation to support Israel with more than foreign aid

"Israel is our strongest ally into the Middle East. Now, more than ever, all democratic nations stand behind Israel as it fights against terrorism and for the principles all democracies share. Democratic nations throughout the world must understand that turning their backs on Israel at this time would hurt all freedom loving nations."

"I believe it is our obligation as friends and supporters and allies of Israel to support Israel's efforts for peace, stability and security. Now, this means doing more than providing Israel with economic aid so that it can remain strong in the face of ongoing threats. We must also demand that President Abbas dismantle the structure of terror that the Palestinian leadership has employed for so long."

Alienated Jewish voters by kissing Mrs. Arafat

Cooperate with Russia when possible & stand up when needed

A: Russia hasn't paid any attention to ISIS. They're interested in keeping Assad in power. When I was secretary of state, I advocated--and I advocate today--a no-fly zone and safe zones. We need some leverage with the Russians, because they are not going to come to the negotiating table for a diplomatic resolution unless there is some leverage over them. I want to emphasize that what is at stake here is the ambitions and the aggressiveness of Russia. Russia has decided that it's all in, in Syria. They've also decided who they want to see become president of the US, too, and it's not me. I've stood up to Russia. I've taken on Putin and others, and I would do that as president. Wherever we can cooperate with Russia, that's fine. And I did as secretary of state. That's how we got a treaty reducing nuclear weapons. It's how we got the sanctions on Iran that put a lid on the Iranian nuclear program without firing a single shot.

Honor treaties with South Korea & Japan: our word is good

CLINTON: Let me start by saying, words matter. Words matter when you run for president. And they really matter when you are president. And I want to reassure our allies in Japan and South Korea and elsewhere that we have mutual defense treaties and we will honor them. It is essential that America's word be good. And so I know that this campaign has caused some questioning and worries on the part of many leaders across the globe. I've talked with a number of them. But I want to--on behalf of myself, and I think on behalf of a majority of the American people, say that, you know, our word is good.

Post-Gadhafi Libya replaced dictator with democracy

CLINTON: Libya is a little different [than Syria]. Libya actually held elections. They elected moderates. They have tried to piece together a government against a lot of really serious challenges internally coming from the outside with terrorist groups and other bad actors. Let's remember what was going on at the time. This was at the height of the Arab spring. The people in Libya were expressing themselves, were demanding their freedom, and Gadhafi responded brutally. Now, they had an election, and it was a fair election, it met international standards. That was an amazing accomplishment for a nation that had been so deprived for so long. This doesn't happen overnight. And, yes, it's been a couple of years. I think it's worth European support, Arab support, American support to try to help the Libyan people realize the dream that they had when they went after Gadhafi.

Address arc of instability from North Africa to South Asia

CLINTON: The president decided to leave more troops than he had originally planned in Afghanistan. We have a cooperative government there. The Afghan army is fighting and taking heavy losses defending Afghan territory. I would have to make an evaluation based on the circumstances at the time I took office as to how much help they continue to need. It's not just the Taliban. We are seeing, fighters claiming to be affiliated with ISIS. We've got an arc of instability from North Africa to South Asia, and we have to pay close attention to it. We have to build coalitions, something I did to take on the Iranian nuclear program, and what I will do as president.

Need more European contribution to defending against Russia

CLINTON: What Secretary Carter is looking at is the constant pressure that Russia's putting on our European allies. I think what Secretary Carter is seeing is that we got to get NATO back working for the common defense. We've got to do more to support our partners in NATO, and we have to send a clear message to Putin that this kind of belligerence will have to be responded to.

We spend a lot on development aid, even in war zones

CLINTON: Well, I think it's perfectly fair to say that we invested quite a bit in development aid. Some of the bravest people that I had the privilege of working with as secretary of state were our development professionals who went sometimes alone, sometimes with our military, into very dangerous places in Iraq, in Afghanistan, elsewhere. So, there does need to be a whole of government approach, but just because we're involved and we have a strategy doesn't mean we're going to be able to dictate the outcome. These are often very long- term kinds of investments that have to be made.

2012: Take a harder line with Russia's Putin

1998: organized women's peace conference in Northern Ireland

2009: Northern Ireland shows any adversaries can make good

Addressing a full session of the Northern Ireland Assembly, I reminded them, "There have been many moments in Northern Ireland's peace journey when progress seemed difficult, when every route forward was blocked, and there seemed to be nowhere to go. But you have always found a way to do what you believed was right for the people of Northern Ireland." Because of this perseverance, "Northern Ireland stands as an example to the world of how even the staunchest adversaries can overcome differences to work together for the common and greater good. So I encourage you to move forward now with that same spirit of unstoppable grit and resolve. And I pledge that the US will be behind you all the way, as you work toward peace and stability that lasts."

Push Russia on press freedom; they've killed 20 journalists

When I visited Moscow in 2009, I thought it important to speak out in support of press freedoms and against the official campaign of intimidation. I met with journalists, lawyers, and other civil society leaders, including one activist who told me that he had been badly beaten by unidentified thugs. These Russians had seen friends and colleagues harassed, intimidated, even killed, yet they went on working, writing, and speaking, refusing to be silenced. I assured them that the US would publicly and privately raise human rights concerns with the Russian government.

Putin's annexing Crimea plays outdated zero-sum game

Putin sees geopolitics as a zero-sum game in which, if someone is winning, then someone else has to be losing. That's an outdated but still dangerous concept, one that requires the US to show both strength and patience. To manage our relationship with the Russians, we should work with them on specific issues when possible, and rally other nations to work with us to prevent or limit their negative behavior when needed.

Russian reset: Pushed Obama to keep Putin at a distance

This was months before Obama ultimately turned away from meeting with Putin, as Russia harbored NSA leaker Snowden. But by including this memo, she reminds readers that Clinton--who became the face of the Russian reset as the top spokesperson for the Obama administration--was more hawkish on Putin than others in the administration.

It's helpful to her at a time when Republicans have been lambasting her over Russian's aggression against Ukraine.

Eastern Europe in NATO keeps Putin from moving beyond Crimea

[Those making that argument] should ponder how much more serious the crisis would be--and how much more difficult it would be--to contain further Russian aggression if Eastern and Central European nations were not now NATO allies. The NATO door should remain open, and we should be clear and tough-minded in dealing with Russia.

If Putin is restrained and doesn't push beyond Crimea into eastern Ukraine it will not be because he has lost his appetite for more power, territory and influence.

2007: Naive to meet with leaders of Iran & North Korea

This looked like another Obama gaffe. The following day, her campaign recruited former secretary of state Madeleine Albright to lead the attack against Obama. During a telephone interview, she launched a personal attack on Obama, [saying], "I thought he was irresponsible and frankly naive."

Committed to maintaining economic embargo against Cuba

Diplomacy with Iran & Cuba, but no presidential meetings

OBAMA: I would not normalize relations until we started seeing some progress [on the US agenda in Cuba]. But I do think that it’s important for the US not just to talk to its friends, but also to talk to its enemies.

CLINTON: I agree that we should be willing to have diplomatic negotiations and processes with anyone. I’ve been a strong advocate of opening up such a diplomatic process with Iran, for a number of years. Because I think we should look for ways that we can possibly move countries that are adversarial to us, toward the world community. It’s in our interests and in the interests of the people in countries that are oppressed, like Cuba, like Iran. But there has been this difference between us over when and whether the president should offer a meeting, without preconditions, with those with whom we do not have diplomatic relations. And it should be part of a process, but I don’t think it should be offered in the beginning

Would use very vigorous and bipartisan diplomacy

Dems believe in fighting terror with cooperation

Voted YES on cooperating with India as a nuclear power.

• Approves the US-India Agreement for Cooperation on Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy.
• Declares that it is US policy to prevent the transfer to India of nuclear equipment, materials, or technology from other participating governments in the Nuclear Suppliers Group or from any other source; and
• any nuclear power reactor fuel reserve provided to India for use in safeguarded civilian nuclear facilities should be commensurate with reasonable reactor operating requirements.

Proponent's argument to vote Yes:Rep. HOWARD BERMAN (D, CA-28): Integrating India into a global nonproliferation regime is a positive step. Before anyone gets too sanctimonious about India's nuclear weapons program, we should acknowledge that the five recognized nuclear weapons states have not done nearly enough to fulfill their commitments under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, including making serious reductions in their own arsenals, nor in the case of the US in ratifying the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

Opponent's argument to vote No:Rep. BARBARA LEE (D, CA-9): In withholding my approval, I seek not to penalize the people of India but, rather, to affirm the principle of nuclear nonproliferation. Jettisoning adherence to the international nuclear nonproliferation framework that has served the world so well for more than 30 years, as approval of the agreement before us would do, is just simply unwise. It is also reckless.

Approval of this agreement undermines our efforts to dissuade countries like Iran and North Korea from developing nuclear weapons. By approving this agreement, all we are doing is creating incentives for other countries to withdraw from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

Voted YES on enlarging NATO to include Eastern Europe.

Progressive Internationalism: globalize with US pre-eminence.

Build a Public Consensus Supporting US Global Leadership
The internationalist outlook that served America and the world so well during the second half of the 20th century is under attack from both ends of the political spectrum. As the left has gravitated toward protectionism, many on the right have reverted to “America First” isolationism.

Our leaders should articulate a progressive internationalism based on the new realities of the Information Age: globalization, democracy, American pre-eminence, and the rise of a new array of threats ranging from regional and ethnic conflicts to the spread of missiles and biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons. This approach recognizes the need to revamp, while continuing to rely on, multilateral alliances that advance U.S. values and interests.

A strong, technologically superior defense is the foundation for US global leadership. Yet the US continues to employ defense strategies, military missions, and force structures left over from the Cold War, creating a defense establishment that is ill-prepared to meet new threats to our security. The US must speed up the “revolution in military affairs” that uses our technological advantage to project force in many different contingencies involving uncertain and rapidly changing security threats -- including terrorism and information warfare.

Goals for 2010
• A clear national policy with bipartisan support that continues US global leadership, adjusts our alliances to new regional threats to peace and security, promotes the spread of political and economic freedom, and outlines where and how we are willing to use force.
• A modernized military equipped to deal with emerging threats to security, such as terrorism, information warfare, weapons of mass destruction, and destabilizing regional conflicts.

Increase aid to avert humanitarian crisis in Congo.

OFFICIAL CONGRESSIONAL SUMMARY:

A bill to promote relief, security, and democracy in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).
• Obligates a specified minimum amount under the Foreign Assistance Act, the Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act, and the Arms Export Control Act for bilateral assistance programs in the DRC.
• States that the US should work with other donor nations to increase international contributions to the DRC.
• Expresses the sense of Congress that the DRC government should exercise control over its Armed Forces, stop the mass rapes by its armed forces, and hold those responsible accountable before an appropriate tribunal; and
• Expresses the sense of Congress that the US should withhold assistance if the government of the DRC is not making sufficient progress towards accomplishing the policy objectives.

SPONSOR'S INTRODUCTORY REMARKS: Sen. OBAMA: There is a country embroiled in conflict that has not yet received the high-level attention or resources it needs. It's the Democratic Republic of Congo, and right now it is in the midst of a humanitarian catastrophe.

31,000 people are dying in the Congo each month and 3.8 million people have died in the previous 6 years. The country, which is the size of Western Europe, lies at the geographic heart of Africa and borders every major region across the continent. If left untended, Congo's tragedy will continue to infect Africa.

I believe that the United States can make a profound difference in this crisis. According to international aid agencies, there are innumerable cost-effective interventions that could be quickly undertaken--such as the provision of basic medical care, immunization and clean water--that could save thousands of lives. On the political front, sustained U.S. leadership could fill a perilous vacuum.

EXCERPTS OF BILL:

LEGISLATIVE OUTCOME:Became Public Law No. 109-456

Implement Darfur Peace Agreement with UN peacekeeping force.

A resolution calling for peace in Darfur.
• Calls upon the government of Sudan and other signatories and non-signatories to the May 5, 2006, Darfur Peace Agreement to cease hostilities.
• Calls upon the government of Sudan to facilitate the deployment of the United Nations-African Union peacekeeping force, including any non-African peacekeepers.
• Urges all invited individuals and movements to attend the next round of peace negotiations without preconditions.
• Condemns: (1) intimidation or threats against camp or civil society leaders to discourage them from attending the peace talks; and (2) actions by any party that undermines the Darfur peace process.
• Calls upon all parties to the Comprehensive Peace Agreement to support all terms of the agreement.
• Legislative Outcome: Resolution agreed to in Senate, by Unanimous Consent.

Acknowledge the Armenian Genocide of the early 1900s.

• WHEREAS the Armenian Genocide was conceived and carried out by the Ottoman Empire from 1915 to 1923, resulting in the deportation of nearly 2,000,000 Armenians, of whom 1,500,000 men, women, and children were killed, and which succeeded in the elimination of more than 2,500-year presence of Armenians in their historic homeland;
• WHEREAS, on May 24, 1915, the Allied Powers issued the joint statement of England, France, and Russia that explicitly charged, for the first time ever, another government of committing "a crime against humanity";
• WHEREAS, despite the international recognition of the Armenian Genocide, the failure of the domestic and international authorities to punish those responsible for the Armenian Genocide is a reason why similar genocides have recurred and may recur in the future, and that a just resolution will help prevent future genocides:
• NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Senate calls on the President, in the President's annual message commemorating the Armenian Genocide, to accurately characterize the systematic annihilation of 1,500,000 Armenians as genocide and to recall the proud history of US intervention in opposition to the Armenian Genocide.

Urge Venezuela to re-open dissident radio & TV stations.

• WHEREAS for several months, the President of Venezuela, Hugo Chávez, has been announcing over various media that he will not renew the current concession of the television station "Radio Caracas Televisión", also known as RCTV, which is set to expire on May 27, 2007, because of its adherence to an editorial stance different from his way of thinking;
• WHEREAS President Chavez justifies this measure based on the alleged role RCTV played in the unsuccessful unconstitutional attempts in April 2002 to unseat President Chavez, under circumstances where there exists no filed complaint or judicial sentence that would sustain such a charge under Venezuelan law;
• NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Senate--
• (1) expresses its profound concern about the transgression against freedom of thought and expression that is being committed in Venezuela by the refusal of the President Hugo Chavez to renew the concession of RCTV
• (2) strongly encourages the Organization of American States to respond appropriately, with full consideration of the necessary institutional instruments, to such transgression.

Call for Burma's junta to release political prisoners.

• WHEREAS Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi has dedicated her life to the peaceful, non-violent movement for democracy and reconciliation in the Union of Burma;
• WHEREAS Aung San Suu Kyi and the National League for Democracy won a majority of parliamentary seats in Burma's last election held in 1990;
• WHEREAS the State Peace and Development Council of Burma refuses to cede power and permit representative government and has detained Aung San Suu Kyi under house arrest for 11 of the last 17 years;
• WHEREAS the ruling military junta has committed numerous, well-documented atrocities against the people of Burma;
• WHEREAS Aung San Suu Kyi continues to promote peaceful dialogue and reconciliation despite mistreatment from the State Peace and Development Council;
• WHEREAS the United States recognizes and supports the dedication and commitment to freedom demonstrated by Aung San Suu Kyi:
• NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Senate--
• (1) honors Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi for her courage and devotion to the people of the Union of Burma and their struggle for democracy; and
• (2)calls for the immediate release of Aung San Suu Kyi and other political prisoners by the State Peace and Development Council.

Develop a strategy to protect civilians in Darfur.

A resolution calling on the United States Government and the international community to promptly develop, fund, and implement a comprehensive regional strategy in Africa to protect civilians, facilitate humanitarian operations, contain and reduce violence, and contribute to conditions for sustainable peace in eastern Chad, northern Central African Republic, and Darfur, Sudan.

Let Ukraine & Georgia enter NATO.

Congressional Summary: A resolution expressing strong support for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to enter into a Membership Action Plan with Georgia and Ukraine:

1. reaffirming support for enlargement of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to include democratic governments that are able to meet the membership responsibilities;
2. that NATO's expansion contributes to its relevance;
3. that Georgia and Ukraine are strong allies that have made important progress in the areas of defense and democratic and human rights reform;
4. that a stronger relationship among Georgia, Ukraine, and NATO will benefit those countries and NATO member states; and
5. that the United States should take the lead in supporting the awarding of a Membership Action Plan to Georgia and Ukraine.

Legislative Outome: Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent.

Condemn violence by Chinese government in Tibet.

A resolution condemning the violence in Tibet and calling for restraint by the Government of the People's Republic of China and the people of Tibet. Calls for:

1. a dialogue between the government of China and His Holiness the Dalai Lama on religious and cultural autonomy for Tibet within China; and
2. release of peaceful protesters.

Calls on the PRC to:
1. respect the right of the people of Tibet to speak of the Dalai Lama and possess his photograph;
2. respect basic human rights;
3. allow international journalists free access to China; and
4. provide a full accounting of the March 2008 protests in Tibet.

Sanction Mugabe until Zimbabwe transitions to democracy.

A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the political situation in Zimbabwe. Expresses the sense of the Senate:

1. supporting the people of Zimbabwe;
2. that the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission should immediately release the legitimate results of the presidential election and ratify the previously announced results of the parliamentary elections;
3. that President Robert Mugabe should accept the will of the people of Zimbabwe in order to effect a timely and peaceful transition to democratic rule;
4. that the U.S. government and the international community should impose targeted sanctions against individuals in the government of Zimbabwe and state security services and militias who are responsible for human rights abuses and election interference;
5. that the U.S. government and the international community should work together to prepare an economic and political recovery package for Zimbabwe;
6. that regional organizations should play an active role in resolving the crisis; and
7. that the U.N. Security Council should support efforts to bring about a peaceful resolution of the crisis and impose an international arms embargo on Zimbabwe until a legitimate democratic government has taken power.

Pressure friendly Arab states to end Israeli boycott.

Dear Secretary Rice,
In the past, the lack of sufficient support from [non-participating] Arab states have made it difficult to reach agreements [on the Arab-Israeli conflict]. You should press friendly Arab countries that have not yet done so, to:
1. Participate in the upcoming international meeting and be a full partner of the US in advancing regional peace
2. Take visible, meaningful steps in the financial, diplomatic and political arena to help Palestinian President Abbas govern effectively and meet obligations to fight terror
3. Stop support for terrorist groups and cease all anti-Israel and anti-Jewish incitement
4. Recognize Israel's right to exist and not use such recognition as a bargaining chip for future Israeli concessions
5. End the Arab League economic boycott of Israel in all of its forms
6. Pressure Hamas to recognize Israel, reject terror, and accept prior agreements, and isolate Hamas until it takes such steps.