There is much speculation that Senator Hillary Clinton could be America's next Secretary of State - responsible, with the President, for formulating and expounding US foreign policy. We have collated some of the statements on foreign policy made by America's former First Lady:
Priorities for US foreign policy
Priorities and vision for foreign policy: “Q: When future historians write of your administration's foreign policy pursuits, what will be noted as your doctrine and the vision you cast for U.S. diplomatic relations?
Clinton: 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.”
The use of force
“We cannot negotiate with individual terrorists; they must be hunted down and captured or killed. Nor can diplomacy alone stop the perpetrators of genocide and crimes against humanity in places such as Darfur. But soldiers are not the answer to every problem. Using force in lieu of diplomacy compels our young men and women in uniform to carry out missions that they may not be trained or prepared for. And it ignores the value of simply carrying a big stick, rather than using it.”
Talks with rogue states
"We must value diplomacy as well as a strong military," Clinton continued. "We should not hesitate to engage in the world's most difficult conflicts on a diplomatic front." "Direct negotiations are not a sign of weakness; they're a sign of leadership," she said. Clinton blasted what she said was the Bush administration's "simplistic division of the world into good and evil. They refuse to talk to anyone on the evil side, as some have called that idealistic. I call it dangerously unrealistic." Referring to the Bush administration's refusal to talk directly to North Korea she said: "Six years of policy with no carrots no sticks and only bad results." (2005)
“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.” (2008)
Cuba: “Q: Very simply, would you meet with Raul Castro or not?
Clinton: 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.
Human rights and freedom
"In an increasingly interdependent world," Clinton said, "it is in our interest to stand for human rights, to promote religious freedom, democracy, women's rights, social justice and economic empowerment." "But reality is, we cannot force others, nations and people, to accept those values. We have to support those who embrace them and lead by example," she said.
Afghanistan
“The forgotten frontline in the war on terror is Afghanistan, where our military effort must be reinforced. The Taliban cannot be allowed to regain power in Afghanistan; if they return, al Qaeda will return with them.”
Iran
“Iran must conform to its nonproliferation obligations and must not be permitted to build or acquire nuclear weapons. If Iran does not comply with its own commitments and the will of the international community, all options must remain on the table. On the other hand, if Iran is in fact willing to end its nuclear weapons program, renounce sponsorship of terrorism, support Middle East peace, and play a constructive role in stabilizing Iraq, the United States should be prepared to offer Iran a carefully calibrated package of incentives.”
China
“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.”
Clinton's relevant Senate votes
In favour of recognising the Armenian genocide, in favour of Venezuela reopening dissident radio and television stations, in favour of Georgia and Ukraine joining NATO, in favour of sanctions against Robert Mugabe.
Differences with Barack Obama
“In October 2007, Obama criticised Clinton's Senate vote to declare the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist group, saying it might clear a path for the Bush administration to invade the country.
The two have also clashed on Mrs Clinton's vote to authorise the Iraq war: "As we learned with the original authorization of the Iraq war - when you give this President a blank check, you can't be surprised when he cashes it," Obama wrote in an opinion piece.”
Differences with Obama on Pakistan: “"He wavers from seeming to believe that mediation and meetings without preconditions can solve some of the world's most intractable problems to advocating rash, unilateral military action without the cooperation of our allies in the most sensitive part of the world," Clinton said.”
Obama, in April 2008, on Clinton’s foreign policy knowledge: “Foreign policy is the area where I am probably most confident that I know more and understand the world better than Senator Clinton or Senator McCain.”
