Obama, Clinton, (and Samantha Power)


Posted by Helena Cobban
March 7, 2008 11:53 AM EST | Link
Filed in US election 2008

Personally, I have not a moment's doubt about Barack Obama being ready "from Day One" to be President of the United States. I have spoken with numerous people who know him and his work far better than I do, and who have held lengthy discussions with him about national-security affairs, whose word regarding his readiness I trust. One of them is that canny and well-tested "Realist" and situational hawk Zbig Brzezinski.

What Obama brings to the role of "Commander-in Chief" that is distinctive is his readiness-- eagerness, even-- to completely re-frame the crucial challenge of our time, which is:

    "How should we seek to redefine and clarify the relationship between the US citizenry and the other 95% of the world's people?"
Up till now, Obama has shown his commitment to a moving determinedly away from fear-mongering; toward a calm and quietly self-confident reassessment of America's place in the world; and toward-- as he and I have both defined this-- "Re-engagement" with the rest of the world on a new, more authentic, and much more respectful and egalitarian basis.

(I certainly hope he doesn't shift his stance on these issues now.)

Hillary Clinton, by contrast, has recently entered in a big way into the distinctly Bushist business of fear-mongering, much-spreading, and tinpot bellicosity.

Honestly, I don't believe any Democratic candidate can out-McCain McCain on that basis. The only way to win-- and the only way to set our country on the right track-- is to change the terms of our national conversation about security affairs, completely.

If I have full confidence in Obama as Commander-in-Chief, I should add that right now I have a little less confidence in the idea that his key foreign-policy advisor Sam Power is "ready" for any high-level job involving the conduct of diplomacy. In an "unguarded moment" in a press interview in the UK yesterday-- where she has gone to promote her new book-- Power described Hillary Clinton as "a monster." She also told the interviewer, Gerri Peev of The Scotsman, that, ""We f***** up in Ohio..."

Neither of those locutions is the language a diplomat of any rank would use. Power-- herself a former hard-hitting journalist-- is quite evidently "a breath of fresh air" in the usually very stuffy world of international diplomacy. She is also extremely smart. But not quite smart enough to have avoided that language in a press interview.

Of the two statement she made to Peev, the only one she took back was the one about Clinton being a monster. In a statement released by Obama's campaign she said: These comments do not reflect my feelings about Sen. Clinton, whose leadership and public service I have long admired.” She also said she "regretted" that remark. (Perhaps she should also have expressed regret over the language used in the other remark, too.)

I really do like and admire Sam Power. She has come under fire recently for some criticisms she voiced back in 2002 about the atrocities the IOF committed during its seizing of Jenin camp. I am strongly inclined to defend her. But if she really aspires to operate at the highest levels of US diplomacy-- as I assume she well might, in an Obama presidency-- then she needs to think a little more carefully before she speaks, and to use her undoubted skills in conceptualizing and wordsmithing to make sure she expresses herself in more temperate tones.



Comments
Comment from... Truesdell, at March 7, 2008 12:43 PM:

Power has since resigned from the campaign.

Comment from... Salah, at March 7, 2008 02:09 PM:


Hillary Clinton, by contrast, has recently entered in a big way into the distinctly Bushist business

Whoever in this race they all entered in such level with the “Bush style Business”, it’s not because Bush right or wrong, but this is the way of campaign in US.

After two term in WH, US and Americans all have set to self scared inside with believes they have the duty as to lead and change the world to the way they like "Bush Style".

There is no wrong in that if done peacefully or by spreading the idea in different ways rather than wars and bulling but unfortunately that "Bush Style" looks have deep set in US mindset.

Comment from... s.e., at March 7, 2008 03:03 PM:

I've been told by sources I trust (and who are in a position to know) that there are a lot of people who worked in the Clinton White House who would agree with Samantha Power. They're not working for Obama but they're voting for him

Comment from... Jack, at March 8, 2008 01:25 AM:

If everyone who thinks that Hillaary is a "monster" had to resign, we would have 150,000,000 new unemployed instead of "just" 63,000. Since when does such a stupid , but harmless, comment require resignation?

Comment from... Murphy, at March 8, 2008 09:05 AM:

"she needs to think a little more carefully before she speaks"

Yup. She needs to understand that not even the mildest criticism of Zion is tolerated by anybody within ten miles of any Presidential candidate, 'left wing' or not.

Comment from... Joshua, at March 8, 2008 07:39 PM:

Murphy, Samantha Power did not resign because of any "criticism of Zion." In fact she remained on the campaign even after some people very strongly attacked her for prior comments concerning Israel.

She resigned because she made an intemperate remark about the rival candidate. Obama has gone to pains to take the high road in this campaign, and Power's comment was considered inconsistent with that approach. Personally, I think it's a bit of an overreaction, but I do like how Obama has kept his cool throughout the campaign, and understand why he doesn't want anyone who might detract from that.

Recent Posts on JWN
• My IPS piece on dimming peace prospects (1)
• Rahm Emanuel's disturbing view of US role (26)
• Obama's peacemaking pledge-- to the world (35)
• Obama: Peace in US interest (5)
• Discussing Palestine, Israel, Iraq on Bloggingheads (0)
• Long knives, Washington, Afghanistan, part 2 (7)
• Long knives out in Washington over Afghanistan (3)
• Amal Saad-Ghorayeb responds (10)
• NATO and Lebanon (16)
• IPS piece on Obama-Netanyahu tussle over priorities (0)
• Gaza police and noncombatant immunity (46)
• Gaza, the Obama administration, and the present (4)
• Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, "benchmarks" (2)
• Barak: Iran not existential threat (0)
• Garlasco, suspended with full pay (15)
• Me, speaking Sept 24 at Middle East Institute (3)
• Goldstone Commission reports on Gaza-war war-crimes (23)
• Another blunt No from Netanyahu (30)
• Ramadan t.v. offerings, 2009 (2)
• I-P: Borders first-- and fast? (4)
• A testimony the world needs to hear (2)
• Garlasco, part 3 (32)
• Malley on refugees, settlers, etc (7)
• In 2009, as 2001: US needs Iran, Russia (3)
• IPS piece on the rights war over Gaza (3)
• Garlasco, part 2 (20)
• Continuing bad news for US/NATO in Afghanistan (4)
• Marc Garlasco's little "hobby" (71)
• Trashing one-staters with Hussein Ibish (12)
• 500 new settlement homes in Jerusalem... (12)
• When election results are disputed: Afghanistan, etc (6)
• B'tselem's figures on Gaza assault toll (8)
• American power has limits? Who knew? (13)
• Israel's assault on Gaza: The final toll (1)
• Hamas-related negotiations moving forward? (1)
• Sweden, and the Israel-linked organs story (18)
• Qtube-- what a resource! (2)
• Cook and Elam on Israel's organ-removal problems (48)
• "The White House regrets... " (48)
• Lessons from the Soviet experience in Afghanistan (9)
• IPS analysis of Iraq and related regional tensions (1)
• Visser goes 2.0 (8)
• More on Norway's targeted divestment (14)
• Pat Lang on the dangerous, continued rise of 'COIN'-mania (8)
• Bravo, Norway! (6)
• An exiled Palestinian visits "home" (20)
• Israel releases nine of 32 Hamas legislators (2)
• Why Blair wants Dahlan to retake Gaza? (0)
• Afghanistan debate: The missing international ingredient (9)
• State-building: Palestine (3)