Was Hillary Clinton an outstanding secretary of state? The question is worth considering because Republicans are going to ensure that, should she run for president, everyone in America will have ample time to think about it.
First, a comment: regular readers will know that I have largely avoided writing columns about the next US presidential election because, well, it’s still early in 2014. We will all have more than ample time to read too much about the next campaign after Washington gets through this year’s midterm elections.
I’m making an exception to my ‘no 2016 campaign columns’ rule because recently Clinton has been unusually visible — and not just because someone threw a shoe at her during a speech in Las Vegas last week. Right now she is doing all of the things that a politician in her position (out of office yet a clear front-runner) does at this early stage of the American campaign cycle: she is keeping herself in the public eye while avoiding political fights of the moment. When asked whether she will run she dodges the question with a smile, but is equally careful never to discourage people who want her to do so.
She inspires fear in the opposition and is widely (though, to be clear, not universally) seen in her own party as a nominee-in-waiting. As a result the former first lady, senator and secretary of state looms over national politics in a way no would-be president has since Ronald Reagan in the late 1970s.
So let’s deal first with the obvious question: will she run? Of course she will run. It is not just that she clearly wants to be president or that her loss to Barack Obama six years ago still stings and may well have left her believing she has something to prove. The simple fact is that no person with national political ambitions who is surrounded, as Clinton is, by people telling her she can and should be president can resist the lure of the campaign. The only conceivable reason why Clinton would not run would be something health related. This is surely possible, but it is more likely that health will not be an issue.
Age will not be an issue either. In 2016 Clinton will be 69. That is younger than John McCain was in 2008. Younger than Bob Dole was when he challenged Bill Clinton in 1996 and several years younger than Reagan was when he was re-elected in 1984.
When Clinton does step formally into the ring a lot of attention is likely to be paid to her time as Obama’s secretary of state. Republicans will try to make the 2012 attack on the US mission in Benghazi into a major issue, but it is hard to see this gaining national traction. America’s right-wing media has hammered away at Benghazi for almost a year and a half, yet the issue fails to ignite strong feelings outside the GOP faithful — a constituency that was never going to vote for Clinton, or any other Democrat. The more pointed question — a question one already hears among more thoughtful Republicans — is simpler: what did Clinton actually do as secretary of state?
Rebuilding America’s image
Of course, when a Republican asks that question the intended answer is clear. Even leaving (the non-scandal of) Benghazi aside, the GOP clearly intends to spend 2016 arguing that Clinton’s tenure at the State Department was undistinguished and notably free of either big ideas or big accomplishments. Republicans will also argue that whether you approve of the Iran talks or not (and, mostly, they don’t) Kerry has done more on this issue in a year than Clinton did in four.
Clinton’s supporters will counter that she was kept on a short leash by an Obama White House that never completely trusted its former political opponent and, in any case, was concerned about re-election from day 1 (anyone who tells you that first-term White Houses do not think this way is either lying or naive). As for Iran: Kerry, unlike his predecessor, is dealing with an Iranian administration that actually wants to make a nuclear deal. That makes progress a lot easier.
At a more basic level, however, this argument dismisses Clinton’s most important accomplishment: her effort to rebuild America’s image abroad after eight years of the George W. Bush administration.
Public diplomacy is often derided by diplomats who operate in a more traditional, behind-closed-doors, arena, but it is hugely important. Hillary’s willingness especially during the first year or two of Obama’s presidency, to use her star power should not be dismissed. In places like Indonesia and Pakistan she held unscripted Q &A sessions with students and other ordinary people. The contrast with previous administrations was striking, and the benefits should not be underestimated.
That does not necessarily make her a better president (though it might make her a better candidate). Neither does it mean she should simply be handed the keys to the White House. It does, however, give her a compelling case to make as the 2016 political season grinds into gear, and that is worth remembering before anyone tries to brush away her time as America’s top diplomat.
Gordon Robison, a longtime Middle East journalist and US political analyst, teaches political science at the University of Vermont.
