The selection, he said later, "was not a light-bulb moment," but it dawned on him that her stature abroad meant she could carry his message faster and farther than anyone else. He simply was not going to have time to travel to as many places and meet as many foreign leaders as he would like. Clinton was not just formidable; she was an international superstar who could advance American interests overnight. Then there was the "team of rivals" concept that Obama borrowed from Doris Kearns Goodwin's book about Abe Lincoln and his Cabinet.
A: Well, that is a very one-sided and inaccurate description of what actually occurred. Let me set the record straight. He went to Kazakhstan to sign an agreement with the government to provide low-cost drugs for HIV/AIDS, a growing problem in central Asia. While he was there, he met with opposition leaders and certainly spoke out about the hopes that we have to have a good relationship with that country. I have been on record for many years against the anti-democratic regime, calling for changes, standing against efforts that would bring them into positions of leadership in the global community without their making changes
A: I certainly did. I not only advised; I often met with he and his advisers, both in preparation for, during and after. I traveled with representatives from the Security Council, the State Department, occasionally the Defense Department, and even the CIA. So I was deeply involved in being part of the Clinton team in the first Clinton administration. And I am someone who want the best possible advice from as many different sources as possible, and that would certainly include my husband.
A: I agree completely that what we need to do is start acting instead of talking. That means accelerating the UN peacekeeping forces along with the African Union. It means moving more quickly on divestment and sanctions on the Sudanese government, including trying to use the diplomacy to get China involved. And, finally, it does mean a no-fly zone. We can do it in a way that doesn’t endanger humanitarian relief.
Q: How about American troops on the ground?
A: I think NATO has to be there with the no-fly zone, and I think that only the US can provide the logistical support and the air lift to make a no-fly zone and the actual delivery of humanitarian aid work.
Q: Does that mean no American ground troops?
A: American ground troops I don’t think belong in Darfur at this time. I think we need to focus on the UN peacekeeping troops and the African Union troops.
A: There are three things we have to do immediately. Move the peacekeepers--that, finally, the United Nations and the African Union have agreed to--into Sudan as soon as possible. In order for them to be effective, there has to be airlift and logistical support, and that can only come either unilaterally from the United States or from NATO. I prefer NATO. And finally, we should have a no-fly zone over Sudan because the Sudanese governments bomb the villages before and after the Janjiwid come. And we should make it very clear to the government in Khartoum we’re putting up a no-fly zone; if they fly into it, we will shoot down their planes. Is the only way to get their attention.
|Other candidates on Foreign Policy:||Hillary Clinton on other issues:|
2016 Democratic Candidates:
2016 Third Party Candidates:
2016 GOP Candidates:
About Hillary Clinton: