Clinton Breaking With Obama’s Foreign Policy

What is motivating Hillary Clinton’s high risk break with President Obama’s foreign policy? High risk

because the very aggressive and high-profile nature of her interview in The Atlantic with Jeff Greenberg makes her vulnerable to attacks from the foreign policy left in the Democratic Party that still remembers her vote for the Iraq War. Also, it could cause alienation from Obama’s still substantial body of support within the Democratic Party.

Assuming Clinton is positioning for a presidential run in 2016 and that her foreign policy statements since her retirement from the State Department in February 2013, especially those in 2014, are mostly a product of that strategy, the following are some thoughts on the political motivation.

• Foreign policy used to be an Obama advantage. Now, he is in trouble. His approval rating on foreign policy is 10 points below his low 40s overall approval rating. Clinton needs some distance.
• Democrats for years were seen as weaker and less skilled in foreign policy. With the collapse of Soviet communism, Bill Clinton did not have many challenges in the 1990s. Those he faced, he was aggressive, for example, in the Bosnia and Kosovo wars. Obama inherited the Iraq War that had lost public support. His drone campaign, surge into Afghanistan and killing Osama Bin Laden gave him considerable cover from his right as he rapidly withdrew from Iraq and mostly restrained new initiatives. But world events have conspired to make his approach look ineffectual and weak. Clinton wants to be positioned as more engaged and assertive, if just as thoughtful. Also, things may get worse.
• As the former Secretary of State, she shares responsibility for the problems just as she takes advantage of the experiences and successes. She is highlighting the differences she had with him over what is now perceived as problems.
• Finally, while being the first woman to be seriously considered for president has many advantages in the era of identity politics and gender gaps, it still has its burdens. And, one is that a woman must show toughness to both break through the stereotype, but also in American politics to not be seen as a hardcore liberal – an old image she had in her early White House days. Foreign policy is, in Clinton’s view, the safest and most productive place to take that turn right.

Clinton’s strategy is bold and dangerous. Her opponents, Republicans and others will use it to encourage division in the party. Liberal Democrats who like Hillary, but would prefer a purer candidate, now have another excuse to shop around.