Hillary Clinton: domestic alliance, international face-saving
Here is an interview with Abbas Maleki on the different views towards Hillary Clinton’s probable election as the US foreign secretary.
What are the objectives and the meanings of Hillary Clinton’s probable election as the US foreign secretary?
Before the presidential election, the US society was in explosion status. Dissatisfaction and civil disobedience of the people were so high as to lead the policy makers to believe that the changes in the government are necessary. They concluded that in absence of such a change, there is the possibility of a comprehensive riot or even revolution breaking out in the country. It was not just the democrats’ belief. Many republican figures were also of the same opinion and believed in the necessity of a change. On the other hand, the US foreign situation was also very bad and this was another reason why both parties concluded that they should find a solution for the crisis. The current US economic and political status was also urging the policy makers to use the viewpoints of all parties and groups. A series of such factors led them to Clinton’s camp; so that the two goals of domestic alliance and international face-saving be accomplished.
Is this choice in contrast to the "change" slogan of Obama?
No it is not. Considering the support she has in the democratic party and even among some of the republicans, it seems that Clinton would enjoy the support of the majority in Congress and Senate. This can be a real change factor in US foreign policy. At the same time, Bill Clinton and his team are an environment-friendly team and this can help Hillary and improve Obama’s cabinet image.
Some people believe that with Hillary becoming the next US foreign secretary, her own political death would not be far away. Do you think so?
It depends on her success in tackling the crises facing the US. Some of these crises are Middle East conflict, Iraq and Afghanistan. If she succeeds, she can powerfully be present in the competitions for the next presidential election. Considering Bill Clinton’s failure on Middle East issues, how do you predict Hillary’s probable policies in the region?
It seems that she would pursue the Middle East talks as her husband did. Hillary believes in the establishment of two independent countries as Palestine and Israel but she advocates a stronger Israel and a weaker Palestine. On Iraq, she would certainly advocate the exit or the reduction of US troops. On Afghanistan, the Americans have concluded that they should leave the country, and this is what she would also do.
What would be her probable position towards Iran?
Hostility towards Iran has been institutionalized in the US system. So the sanctions against Iran and the attempts to isolate Iran would continue. But with Hillary as the foreign secretary, the possibility of a military attack against Iran would be less.
Before the presidential election, the US society was in explosion status. Dissatisfaction and civil disobedience of the people were so high as to lead the policy makers to believe that the changes in the government are necessary. They concluded that in absence of such a change, there is the possibility of a comprehensive riot or even revolution breaking out in the country. It was not just the democrats’ belief. Many republican figures were also of the same opinion and believed in the necessity of a change. On the other hand, the US foreign situation was also very bad and this was another reason why both parties concluded that they should find a solution for the crisis. The current US economic and political status was also urging the policy makers to use the viewpoints of all parties and groups. A series of such factors led them to Clinton’s camp; so that the two goals of domestic alliance and international face-saving be accomplished.
Is this choice in contrast to the "change" slogan of Obama?
No it is not. Considering the support she has in the democratic party and even among some of the republicans, it seems that Clinton would enjoy the support of the majority in Congress and Senate. This can be a real change factor in US foreign policy. At the same time, Bill Clinton and his team are an environment-friendly team and this can help Hillary and improve Obama’s cabinet image.
Some people believe that with Hillary becoming the next US foreign secretary, her own political death would not be far away. Do you think so?
It depends on her success in tackling the crises facing the US. Some of these crises are Middle East conflict, Iraq and Afghanistan. If she succeeds, she can powerfully be present in the competitions for the next presidential election. Considering Bill Clinton’s failure on Middle East issues, how do you predict Hillary’s probable policies in the region?
It seems that she would pursue the Middle East talks as her husband did. Hillary believes in the establishment of two independent countries as Palestine and Israel but she advocates a stronger Israel and a weaker Palestine. On Iraq, she would certainly advocate the exit or the reduction of US troops. On Afghanistan, the Americans have concluded that they should leave the country, and this is what she would also do.
What would be her probable position towards Iran?
Hostility towards Iran has been institutionalized in the US system. So the sanctions against Iran and the attempts to isolate Iran would continue. But with Hillary as the foreign secretary, the possibility of a military attack against Iran would be less.