August 16, 2014

What if Hillary Had Won in 2008?

Aaron David Miller, Washington Post

The Associated Press

Clinton’s policies would probably not have diverged fundamentally from the ones the president pursued while she was his secretary of state or those he has embraced subsequently. Indeed, Clinton could never have become Obama’s top diplomat and functioned so well in that job had they not been largely on the same page in terms of how they saw the world and what America should do about it. They both are transactors, not ideological transformers — smart, pragmatic centrists largely coloring inside the lines in a world of long shots and bad options. In other words, there’s no need for them to “hug it out” on foreign policy.

Read Full Article ››

TAGGED: U.S. Foreign Policy, Middle East, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, 2016 Presidential Election, 2008

RECOMMENDED ARTICLES

August 15, 2014
Does America Need an 'Organizing Principle'?
Noah Gordon, The Atlantic
The lack of an organizing principle encourages the consideration of each action on its own merits. Arming America’s Kurdish allies in Iraq, for instance, isn’t the same as arming painstakingly vetted rebels in Syria.... more ››
August 15, 2014
All the President's Men and Women
Michael Weiss, NOW Lebanon
When Obama hasn’t been doing battle with the Islamic State (IS) in and around Iraqi Kurdistan, he’s been ranged against former members of his own administration who, either out of principle or opportunism, have... more ››
August 12, 2014
Clinton, Obama and Iraq
David Brooks, New York Times
Obama and Clinton represent different Democratic tendencies. In their descriptions of the current situation in Iraq, Clinton emphasizes that there cannot be inclusive politics unless the caliphate is seriously pushed back, while... more ››