Commit to helping people abroad before committing troops
Q: Underdeveloped nations that lack widespread access to education and basic resources like water tend to be some of the most unstable and dangerous regions of the world. As president, would you consider committing US troops to a purely humanitarian
mission under the leadership of a foreign flag?
A: I believe strongly that we have to get back to leading on issues like health care and education and women’s rights around the world. I have introduced bipartisan legislation called The Education for Al
Act, to have the US lead the world in putting the 77 million kids who aren’t in school into school. I believe we should demonstrate our commitment to people who are poor, disenfranchised, disempowered before we talk about putting troops anywhere.
The US has to be seen again as a peacekeeper, and we have lost that standing in these last seven years. So I think we have to concentrate first and foremost on restoring our moral authority in the world and our standing in the world.
FactCheck: Accomplished but exaggerated foreign experience
Clinton recently listed five foreign policy accomplishments to demonstrate her qualifications as commander-in-chief. The public record of her actions shows that many of Clinton’s foreign policy claims are exaggerated.
Clinton claims she “negotiate
open borders” in Macedonia to fleeing Kosovar refugees. But the Macedonian border opened before she arrived.
Clinton’s activities “helped bring peace to Northern Ireland.” Irish officials disagree on her contribution, but agree that she wasn’t directl
involved in any actual negotiations.
Clinton has repeatedly referenced her “dangerous” trip to Bosnia, but fails to mention that the Bosnian war had officially ended 3 months before her visit.
Hillary claims she privately championed the use of
US troops to stop the genocide in Rwanda. That conversation with Bill Clinton left no public record, & US policy was explicitly to stay out of Rwanda.
Clinton’s tough speech on human rights delivered to a Beijing audience is as advertised.
Meet with Cuban leaders only after evidence of change
Q: Would you be willing to sit down with Raul Castro, to get a measure of the man?
A: The people of Cuba deserve to have a democracy. And this gives the Cuban government, under Raul Castro, a chance to change direction from the one that was set for
50 years by his brother. I’m going to be looking for some of those changes: releasing political prisoner, ending some of the oppressive practices on the press, opening up the economy. Of course the US stands ready. And, as president,
I would be ready to reach out and work with a new Cuban government, once it demonstrated that it truly was going to change that direction.
Q: Very simply, would you meet with Raul Castro or not?
A: I would not meet with him until there was
evidence that change was happening. A presidential visit should not be offered without some evidence that it will demonstrate the kind of progress that is in our interest, and in this case, in the interests of the Cuban people.
Diplomacy with Iran & Cuba, but no presidential meetings
Q: [to Obama]: Do you support normalizing relations with Cuba now?
OBAMA: I would not normalize relations until we started seeing some progress [on the US agenda in Cuba]. But I do think that it’s important for the US not just to talk to its friends,
but also to talk to its enemies.
CLINTON: I agree that we should be willing to have diplomatic negotiations and processes with anyone. I’ve been a strong advocate of opening up such a diplomatic process with Iran, for a number of years. Because I think
we should look for ways that we can possibly move countries that are adversarial to us, toward the world community. It’s in our interests and in the interests of the people in countries that are oppressed, like Cuba, like Iran. But there has been this
difference between us over when and whether the president should offer a meeting, without preconditions, with those with whom we do not have diplomatic relations. And it should be part of a process, but I don’t think it should be offered in the beginning
Q: The NY Times reported that in 2005, your husband flew to Kazakhstan with a Canadian businessman, and he helped the businessman get a huge uranium deal by praising the Kazakh dictator, and then a few months later, that Canadian businessman made a $31
million donation to the Clinton Foundation. Are you going to tell your husband to knock off those kinds of dealings?
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
Establish leadership & moral authority via multilateralism
Q: When future historians write of your administration’s foreign policy pursuits, what will be noted as your doctrine and the vision you cast for U.S. diplomatic relations?
A: It will be a doctrine of restoring
America’s leadership and moral authority through multilateral organizations, through attempts to come to agreements on issues ranging from global warming to stopping the proliferation of nuclear weapons and other dangerous weapons.
It will be a doctrine that demonstrates that the
United States is not afraid to cooperate; that through cooperation in our interdependent world, we actually can build a stronger country and a stronger world that will be more reflective of our values.
Deeply involved with Bill Clinton’s foreign policy team
Q: When you traveled to China and then when you returned to the White House, did you advise your husband on Chinese foreign policy or on foreign policy in regard to any other countries that you traveled to?
And conversely, if you were elected president, would he advise you?
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.
Operate from a position of strength, but not confrontation
Q: Should we believe that the U.S. relationship with China under a Hillary Clinton administration would be less one of cooperation and engagement and one more akin to confrontation?
A: No, absolutely not.
It would be a position where we would operate from strength with a coherent policy about what our interests were and what we hope to achieve.
Source: 2007 Democratic radio debate on NPR
Dec 4, 2007
2001 speech to AIPAC pledges money for Israeli military
On a visit to Gaza City in 1998, Hillary met with Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat and his wife and declared, well ahead of the official line from the White House, her support for a Palestinian state.
Her husband’s spokesperson had to distance him from her comment.
As a senator, however, one of her first major speeches was to AIPAC, the Israeli lobby group where she pledged to work to send more money, not for peacekeeping, or to both sides, but for
Israel’s military. (She’s spoken to AIPAC many times since.)
On the fortieth anniversary of the Israeli occupation of West Bank and Gaza, Clinton joined the rest of the
Senate in sending a message of congratulations and support to the Israeli government. No encouraging message went to the Palestinians still enduring occupation.
Supported strong funding for international development
Hillary worked quietly with her husband’s top officials on their budgets and policy priorities in areas that interested her, such as the US Agency for International Development.
Brian Atwood, the director of USAID, said that Hillary “deserves more credit. than anyone” for securing an increase in funding for his agency in 1997.
Source: For Love of Politics, by Sally Bedell Smith, p.263
Oct 23, 2007
Cuba deserves peaceful transition to freedom & democracy
Q: What do you think would happen in Cuba without Fidel Castro? And what role would the US play in that transition?
A: The Cuban people deserve freedom and democracy, and we’re all hopeful that that can be brought about peacefully. It appears as
though the reign of Castro is reaching an end. We don’t know what will follow Fidel Castro, but we need to do everything we can to work with our friends in Latin America who are democratic nations, with the Europeans and others, to try to bring about a
peaceful transition to democracy and freedom for the Cuban people. Now, that requires that we work with the entire hemisphere. You know, in 1994 I remember being here in Miami when my husband hosted the Summit of the Americas.
At that time, there was only one anti-democratic, anti-American leader in the hemisphere, namely Castro. Look at what we face today because of the misguided, bullying policies of this president. So let’s reverse it and get ready for freedom in Cuba!
Should not telegraph our adversaries about preconditions
Q: Is Sen. Obama “not yet ready” to be president?
CLINTON: I’m running on my own qualifications and experience. It’s really up to the voters to make these decisions. I think we have a great group of candidates. You don’t have to be against anybody.
You can choose who you’re for.
Q: But you did say that Sen. Obama’s views on meeting with foreign dictators are “naive and irresponsible.” Doesn’t that imply that he’s not ready for the office?
CLINTON: Well, we had a specific disagreement, because
I do not think that a president should give away the bargaining chip of a personal meeting with any leader, unless you know what you’re going to get out of that. It takes a lot of planning to move an agenda forward, particularly with our adversaries.
You should not telegraph to our adversaries that you’re willing to meet with them without preconditions during the first year in office.
OBAMA: Strong countries and strong presidents meet and talk with our adversaries. We shouldn’t be afraid to do so.
US support & no-fly zone, but UN troops on ground in Darfur
Q: What about American troops in Darfur?
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.
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.
Arabic and Muslim countries take women leaders seriously
Q: The Arab states, Muslim nations, treat their women as 2nd-class citizens. As president, how do you feel that you would even be taken seriously by these states in any kind of negotiations or diplomatic relations?
A: You know, when I was First Lady,
I was privileged to represent our country in 82 countries. I have met with many officials in Arabic and Muslim countries. I have met with kings and presidents and prime ministers and sheiks and tribal leaders. And certainly, in the last years during my
time in the Senate, I have had many high-level meetings with presidents and prime ministers in Iraq, Afghanistan, Kuwait, Pakistan and many other countries. I believe that there isn’t much doubt in anyone’s mind that I can be taken seriously.
Other countries have had women presidents and women prime ministers. There are several serving now--in Germany, in Chile, in Liberia and elsewhere--and I have noticed that their compatriots on the world stage certainly take them seriously.
Diplomacy yes; propaganda no; when meeting enemy leaders
Q: Would you be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of your administration, with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba & N.Korea?
OBAMA: I would. The notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment
to them is ridiculous. I think that it is a disgrace that we have not spoken to them.
CLINTON: I will not promise to meet with the leaders of these countries during my first year. I will promise a very vigorous diplomatic effort but not a high level
meeting before you know what the intentions are. I don’t want to be used for propaganda purposes. But I certainly agree that we need to get back to diplomacy, which has been turned into a bad word by this administration. I will use a lot of high-level
presidential envoys to test the waters, to feel the way. But certainly, we’re not going to just have our president meet with Fidel Castro & Hugo Chavez & the president of North Korea, Iran & Syria until we know better what the way forward would be.
In 1981, while the Clintons campaigned to win back the governorship, their pastor, Vaught approached them about a trip to Israel. As Bill and Hillary found themselves struggling spiritually and politically to put
Bill back in the governor’s mansion, the couple decided to go.
In contrast to the anti-Israel version of Hillary portrayed during parts of the 1970s, some sources claim this trip gave Hillary an inspired appreciation for the state of
Israel, and if so, it may have mitigated her alleged pro-PLO sympathies, giving more balance in her perspective. A friend of the Clintons says: “Bill and
Hillary understood the profound effect that Israel has on American Jews and around the world and share a feeling for the security and stability of the State of Israel.”
Q: Darfur is the second time that our nation has had a chance to do something about genocide in Africa. The first came in Rwanda in 1994, when we did nothing.
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.
Supported Palestine in 1998, before Bill officially did
In 1998, Hillary laid out her vision for the future of the Middle East: “It would be in the long-term interests of peace in the Middle East for there to be a state of Palestine, a functioning modern state that is on the same footing as other states.” The
White House raced to clarify the remarks as Hillary’s own.
Several months later, while attending a meeting of the Palestinian National Council, Hillary praised Yasser Arafat’s leadership and again called for the establishment of an independent
In 1999, while traveling in the Middle East, Hillary had a joint appearance with Yasser Arafat’s wife, Suha. Ms. Arafat took the occasion to accuse Israel of poisoning her people. It was an outlandish accusation, but it did not stop
Hillary from giving Suha a kiss when she finished talking.
Roll forward 8 months. Hillary, now a candidate for the Senate, called for moving the US embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, “the eternal & indivisible capital of Israel.”
Obligation to support Israel with more than foreign aid
"Israel is our strongest ally into the Middle East. Now, more than ever, all democratic nations stand behind Israel as it fights against terrorism and for the principles all democracies share. Democratic nations throughout the world must
understand that turning their backs on Israel at this time would hurt all freedom loving nations."
(Senator Hillary Clinton, letter to Colin Powell, April 9, 2002)
"I believe it is our obligation as friends and supporters and
allies of Israel to support Israel's efforts for peace, stability and security. Now, this means doing more than providing Israel with economic aid so that it can remain strong in the face of ongoing threats. We must also demand that
President Abbas dismantle the structure of terror that the Palestinian leadership has employed for so long."
(Senator Hillary Clinton, American Israel Public Affairs Committee Policy Conference, May 24, 2005)
"The U.S. benefits from a stronger, more effective U.N. As the founding nation, the host nation, and the largest contributor, the United States has far more to gain that to lose by insisting on reform, transparency, and performance.
In the humanitarian and peacekeeping fields, we pay roughly one quarter of the overall costs, and we pay 22 percent of the regular budget. Thus, if the
UN is effective, our investment if highly leveraged. If it is weak, our money--along with yours--is worth less, and more of the burden will fall directly on us, the richer nations represented here today. Thus,
I fully support the Secretary General's reform efforts, and urge him to do even more."
(Senator Hillary Clinton, Munich Conference on Security Policy, February 13, 2005)
1995: Spoke as voice of United States on Latin America trip
While I was dealing with Bosnia at home, Hillary was off on another trip, this time to Latin America. In the post-Cold War world, with
America the world's only military, economic, and political superpower, every nation wanted out attention, and it was usually in our interest to give it. But I couldn't go everywhere, especially during the budget struggle with Congress.
As a result, both Al Gore and Hillary made an unusually large number of important foreign trips. Wherever they went, people knew they spoke for the
United States, and for me, and on every trip, without fail, they strengthened America's standing in the world.
My visit to the subcontinent was meant to demonstrate that this strategic and volatile part of the world was important to the US and that Bill supported their efforts to strengthen democracy, expand free markets and promote tolerance and human rights.
China had been chosen to host the upcoming UN Fourth World Conference on Women, and I was scheduled to attend as honorary Chair of the US delegation.
Typically, governments limit their foreign policies to diplomatic, military and trade issues,
the staple of most treaties, pacts and negotiations. Seldom are issues such as women's health, the education of girls, the absence of women's legal and political rights or their economic isolation injected into the foreign policy debate. Yet it was clear
to me that in the new global economy, individual countries and regions would find it difficult to make economic or social progress if a disproportionate percentage of their female population remained poor, uneducated, unhealthy, and disenfranchised.
The UN women's conference was expected to provide an important forum for nations to address issues such as maternal and child health care, microfinance, domestic violence, girls' education, family planning, women's suffrage, property and legal rights.
Hillary faced a problem with Jewish voters after kissing Suha Arafat, the wife of Yasir Arafat, shortly after the first Lady of the Palestine Liberation Army charged Israelis with using poison gas on Palestinians. The first lady of the
United States explained that she hadn’t understood the translation of Madam Arafat’s remarks. When the actual and quite clear translation was made public and the excuse evaporated, she retreated to a mushier explanation, and then silence.
Source: The Final Days, by Barbara Olson, p. 38
Oct 25, 2001
Engage in world affairs, including human rights
Hillary Clinton called for the US to reject isolationism and aggressively engage itself in world affairs in the tradition of President Truman at the end of WWII. Staking out a more internationalist position than many of her fellow Democrats, Clinton
called for expanding the definition of American interests beyond the loss of American lives and the protection of American dollars to include such things as women’s and human rights, environmental protection and the spread of deadly diseases.
Source: Dean Murphy, NY Times
Oct 20, 2000
Human rights are central to our objectives abroad
“At this decisive moment in our history, I believe America needs a renewed internationalism, not an old isolation,” Clinton said. “It very much is in our interest to assert the leadership required to meet our strategic and national security needs and
interests around the world.” Saying that the US should do more than just intervene in “splendid little wars” in which it can prevail, Clinton claimed she reflected the views of NY’s current senator, Daniel Patrick Moynihan.
And while aligning herself with her husband on many issues, she called for a broader foreign policy mandate that, for instance, considers disease fighting a national security issue and deems the rights of women a priority.
“I think it has become increasingly clear that our efforts to ensure democracy and human rights cannot be considered marginal but are indeed central to our foreign policy objectives this century,” Mrs. Clinton said.
Source: Dean Murphy, NY Times
Oct 20, 2000
Keep Cuban embargo; pay UN bills
Hillary Clinton said she would oppose lifting the embargo against Cuba until democracy took root there. She said she would support paying America’s unpaid bills to the United Nations.
She once again voiced her support for Israel and, while praising the tentative cease-fire agreement between the Israelis and Palestinians reached Monday, she made it clear the burden was on Yasir Arafat to end the violence.
Source: Dean Murphy, NY Times
Oct 20, 2000
Smartest strategic choice is peace
By working for peace, we are not being na‹ve or soft-headed. We recognize that peace in the Middle East is not only a moral imperative, but the smartest strategic choice to ensure security for the children of Israel. That doesn’t mean that Israel can
ever let down her defenses. It doesn’t mean that her friends, especially the US, will ever be relieved of our responsibility to help Israel maintain her military strength.The work of peace and the work of democracy are neverending.
Source: Remarks at Tel Aviv Performing Arts Center
Nov 11, 1999
Puerto Rico: Stop using live ammo at Vieques
There should be an immediate and permanent end to the bombing. The use of live fire on the island (Puerto Rico) has put the people of Vieques at risk, degraded the environment, and hampered economic development.
Source: Press Release
Oct 19, 1999
Foreign aid spending is only 1%; lead by remaining engaged
I think many people are mistaken about how much money we spend on foreign aid. We spend 1%, and many believe we spend 25%. That 1% investment has made a difference in solving problems but also in helping America to be stronger by solving problems around
the world. We sometimes learn lessons we can bring home. I want us to continue to be a leader, and you don’t lead from behind walls. You don’t lead by walking away from the world. I think you lead by remaining engaged and trying to shape events.
Source: Unique Voice, p.111-12
Feb 3, 1997
Supports micro-loans to third-world women
From the Grameen Bank in Bangladesh to the Self-employed Women’s Association in India, or to the work in Ghana, to banks and programs modeled on these from Indonesia to the Dominican Republic, to my own country, we have seen that microlending works.
Women who have received loans from the Grameen Bank, for example, have a repayment rate of 97%, and often within one year. And they invest their money well.
Source: Unique Voice, p.115-16: Remarks to UN Development Fund
Sep 6, 1995
Hillary Clinton on China
Boycott Olympic ceremony to pressure China on Tibet & Sudan
Q: China has continued to persecute the people of Tibet. China is not doing all it can to stop the genocide in Darfur. Is our participation in the Beijing Olympics harmful to that our voice in the world?
A: Last week I called on our president to not
attend the opening ceremonies of the Olympics [to protest] Beijing government’s actions. [We should push] the Chinese to end the suppression of Tibetans and undermining their culture & religious beliefs, and to get more cooperation with respect to Sudan.
But the challenge is, how do we try to influence the Chinese government? I believe we have missed many opportunities during the Bush administration to do so. In fact, I think it’s fair to say our policy toward China is incoherent and that has not been
in our strategic interest. So I would urge the president to not attend the opening ceremonies, and let’s see whether the Chinese government responds because that would be a great loss of face and perhaps we would get more cooperation.
Establish coherent diplomatic approach toward China
Q: Who has more leverage, China or the US?
A: We currently still have more leverage, but it doesn’t really count because we’re not using it. We have handicapped ourselves because of Bush’s irresponsible fiscal policies, but we’ve also, unfortunately,
seen an incoherent foreign policy. I fear that if we don’t start taking steps to demonstrate that we are back in charge of our fiscal destiny, that we do have a coherent diplomatic approach toward China, China will continue to gain leverage over us.
Source: 2007 Des Moines Register Democratic debate
Dec 13, 2007
China respects us if we call them on human rights breaches
Q: Many talk tough about China and its human rights record in the past but, in the end, favor securing our economic interest rather than risk upsetting China. How would you balance human rights & trade with China?
A: You know, 12 years ago, I went to
China, and the Chinese didn’t want me to come. And they didn’t want me to make a speech, and when I made the speech, they blocked it out from being heard within China, where I stood up for human rights and in particular women’s rights, because women had
been so brutally abused in many settings in China. And I think you do have to call them on human rights. I mean, the Chinese respect us if we actually call them on their misbehavior and their breaches of human rights, economic activities and other kinds
of problems that we have with them. That’s what I object to about this administration. We’ve gotten the worst of both worlds. We’ve gotten neither the kind of smart enforcement nor the kind of cooperation that might lead to changes in behavior.
FactCheck: Chinese did black out Hillary, but DID invite her
Clinton stretched the facts when she claimed the Chinese didn’t want her to come to the UN Conference on Women in 1995. Clinton said, “The Chinese didn’t want me to come... & didn’t want me to make a speech, and when I made the speech, they blocked it
out from being heard within China.”
Most of what Clinton said is true. The Chinese certainly weren’t eager for her speech to be widely heard. They blacked it out, allowing just 5,000 carefully selected Party members to hear it. From their perspective,
they may have been right to do so. She was critical of China’s human rights record in general, especially its treatment of women. Republicans and Democrats alike praised the tough tone of her speech.
But contrary to Clinton’s claim, the Chinese very
much wanted her to come; she was considered a prize catch. The government even released an American, human rights activist Harry Wu, whom they had convicted of espionage, at least in part as a good faith gesture to convince Clinton to attend the event.
Our fiscal responsibility undercuts Chinese power over us
Q: Is China an ally or an adversary?
BIDEN: They’re neither. The fact of the matter is, though, they hold the mortgage on our house. This administration, in order to fund a war that shouldn’t be being fought and tax cuts that weren’t needed--we’re now
in debt almost a trillion dollars to China.
CLINTON: I want to say amen to Joe Biden, because he’s 100% right. You know, 6 years ago, we had a balanced budget and a surplus; now we are in deep debt with a rising deficit, and it is absolutely true that
George Bush has put it on the credit card, expecting our children and grandchildren to pay for it. We’ve got to get back to fiscal responsibility in order to undercut the Chinese power over us because of the debt we hold. We also have to deal with their
currency manipulation. We have to have tougher standards on what they import into this country. I do not want to eat bad food from China or have my children having toys that are going to get them sick. So let’s be tougher on China going forward.
China: criticized authoritarianism with women & children
Could the First Lady of the US go to China and criticize its government for authoritarian practices in dealing with women, children, and political activists? The very thought made traditionalists in the White House and the State Department
shudder. Her chief of staff said, “More people thought she should not go. Hillary felt strongly she should.”
[At the conference], the First Lady lambasted China’s Communist government for suppressing free speech and the right
to assemble at the grassroots women’s forum [of the UN Conference]. She inspired the women there to make their voices heard against selling girls into prostitution, against rape
as a tactic of war, against forced abortion or sterilization. “Human rights are women’s rights. And women’s rights are human rights, once and for all.”
Kennedy said he wouldn’t be afraid to negotiate, but he would expect there to be a lot of preparatory work done, to find out exactly what we would get out of it. Therefore, we should be eliminating the policy of the Bush administration, which has been
very narrowly defined, and frankly against our interests, because we have failed to reach out to countries, we have alienated our friends, & we have emboldened our enemies. I would get back to very vigorous diplomacy, and I would use bipartisan diplomacy
Source: 2008 Democratic debate at University of Texas in Austin
Feb 21, 2008
Dems believe in fighting terror with cooperation
We believe in fighting terror and other threats to our security by cooperating with others whenever we can and acting alone only when we are forced to. Republicans believe just the reverse -- in acting alone whenever they can, and cooperating only when
there is no alternative. So for five and a half years, they have controlled the White House and the Congress, and they have succeeded in concentrating wealth and power, in resisting accountability, in ignoring evidence, and going it alone in the world.
Source: Annual 2006 Take Back America Conference
Jun 14, 2006
Voted YES on cooperating with India as a nuclear power.
Congressional Summary:US-India Nuclear Cooperation Approval and Nonproliferation Enhancement Act:
Approves the US-India Agreement for Cooperation on Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy.
Declares that it is US policy to prevent the transfer to India of nuclear equipment, materials, or technology from other participating governments in the Nuclear Suppliers Group or from any other source; and
any nuclear power reactor fuel reserve provided to India for use in safeguarded civilian nuclear facilities should be commensurate with reasonable reactor operating requirements.
Proponent's argument to vote Yes:Rep. HOWARD BERMAN (D, CA-28): Integrating India into a global nonproliferation regime is a positive step. Before anyone gets too sanctimonious about India's nuclear weapons program, we should acknowledge that the five recognized nuclear weapons states have not done nearly enough to fulfill their commitments under the Nuclear
Nonproliferation Treaty, including making serious reductions in their own arsenals, nor in the case of the US in ratifying the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.
Opponent's argument to vote No:Rep. BARBARA LEE (D, CA-9): In withholding my approval, I seek not to penalize the people of India but, rather, to affirm the principle of nuclear nonproliferation. Jettisoning adherence to the international nuclear nonproliferation framework that has served the world so well for more than 30 years, as approval of the agreement before us would do, is just simply unwise. It is also reckless.
Approval of this agreement undermines our efforts to dissuade countries like Iran and North Korea from developing nuclear weapons. By approving this agreement, all we are doing is creating incentives for other countries to withdraw from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
Reference: US-India Nuclear Agreement;
; vote number 2008-S211
on Oct 1, 2008
Voted YES on enlarging NATO to include Eastern Europe.
H.R. 3167; Gerald B. H. Solomon Freedom Consolidation Act of 2001, To endorse the vision of further enlargement of the NATO Alliance. Vote to pass a bill that would support further expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, authorize military assistance to several eastern European countries and lift assistance restrictions on Slovakia.
Progressive Internationalism: globalize with US pre-eminence.
Clinton adopted the manifesto, "A New Agenda for the New Decade":
Build a Public Consensus Supporting US Global Leadership The internationalist outlook that served America and the world so well during the second half of the 20th century is under attack from both ends of the political spectrum. As the left has gravitated toward protectionism, many on the right have reverted to “America First” isolationism.
Our leaders should articulate a progressive internationalism based on the new realities of the Information Age: globalization, democracy, American pre-eminence, and the rise of a new array of threats ranging from regional and ethnic conflicts to the spread of missiles and biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons. This approach recognizes the need to revamp, while continuing to rely on, multilateral alliances that advance U.S. values and interests.
A strong, technologically superior defense is the foundation for US global leadership. Yet the US continues to employ defense strategies, military missions, and force
structures left over from the Cold War, creating a defense establishment that is ill-prepared to meet new threats to our security. The US must speed up the “revolution in military affairs” that uses our technological advantage to project force in many different contingencies involving uncertain and rapidly changing security threats -- including terrorism and information warfare.
Goals for 2010
A clear national policy with bipartisan support that continues US global leadership, adjusts our alliances to new regional threats to peace and security, promotes the spread of political and economic freedom, and outlines where and how we are willing to use force.
A modernized military equipped to deal with emerging threats to security, such as terrorism, information warfare, weapons of mass destruction, and destabilizing regional conflicts.
Source: The Hyde Park Declaration 00-DLC12 on Aug 1, 2000
Increase aid to avert humanitarian crisis in Congo.
Clinton co-sponsored increasing aid to avert humanitarian crisis in Congo
OFFICIAL CONGRESSIONAL SUMMARY:
A bill to promote relief, security, and democracy in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).
Obligates a specified minimum amount under the Foreign Assistance Act, the Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act, and the Arms Export Control Act for bilateral assistance programs in the DRC.
States that the US should work with other donor nations to increase international contributions to the DRC.
Expresses the sense of Congress that the DRC government should exercise control over its Armed Forces, stop the mass rapes by its armed forces, and hold those responsible accountable before an appropriate tribunal; and
Expresses the sense of Congress that the US should withhold assistance if the government of the DRC is not making sufficient progress towards accomplishing the policy objectives.
SPONSOR'S INTRODUCTORY REMARKS: Sen. OBAMA: There is a country embroiled in conflict that has not yet
received the high-level attention or resources it needs. It's the Democratic Republic of Congo, and right now it is in the midst of a humanitarian catastrophe.
31,000 people are dying in the Congo each month and 3.8 million people have died in the previous 6 years. The country, which is the size of Western Europe, lies at the geographic heart of Africa and borders every major region across the continent. If left untended, Congo's tragedy will continue to infect Africa.
I believe that the United States can make a profound difference in this crisis. According to international aid agencies, there are innumerable cost-effective interventions that could be quickly undertaken--such as the provision of basic medical care, immunization and clean water--that could save thousands of lives. On the political front, sustained U.S. leadership could fill a perilous vacuum.
EXCERPTS OF BILL:
LEGISLATIVE OUTCOME:Became Public Law No. 109-456
Source: Congo Relief, Security, and Democracy Promotion Act (S.2125) 05-S2125 on Dec 16, 2005
Implement Darfur Peace Agreement with UN peacekeeping force.
Clinton co-sponsored implementing Darfur Peace Agreement with UN peacekeeping force
A resolution calling for peace in Darfur.
Calls upon the government of Sudan and other signatories and non-signatories to the May 5, 2006, Darfur Peace Agreement to cease hostilities.
Calls upon the government of Sudan to facilitate the deployment of the United Nations-African Union peacekeeping force, including any non-African peacekeepers.
Urges all invited individuals and movements to attend the next round of peace negotiations without preconditions.
Condemns: (1) intimidation or threats against camp or civil society leaders to discourage them from attending the peace talks; and (2) actions by any party that undermines the Darfur peace process.
Calls upon all parties to the Comprehensive Peace Agreement to support all terms of the agreement.
Legislative Outcome: Resolution agreed to in Senate, by Unanimous Consent.
Acknowledge the Armenian Genocide of the early 1900s.
Clinton co-sponsored acknowledging the Armenian Genocide of the early 1900s
WHEREAS the Armenian Genocide was conceived and carried out by the Ottoman Empire from 1915 to 1923, resulting in the deportation of nearly 2,000,000 Armenians, of whom 1,500,000 men, women, and children were killed, and which succeeded in the elimination of more than 2,500-year presence of Armenians in their historic homeland;
WHEREAS, on May 24, 1915, the Allied Powers issued the joint statement of England, France, and Russia that explicitly charged, for the first time ever, another government of committing "a crime against humanity";
WHEREAS, despite the international recognition of the Armenian Genocide, the failure of the domestic and international authorities to punish those responsible for the Armenian Genocide is a reason why similar genocides have recurred and may recur in the future, and that a just resolution will help prevent future genocides:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Senate calls on the President, in the
President's annual message commemorating the Armenian Genocide, to accurately characterize the systematic annihilation of 1,500,000 Armenians as genocide and to recall the proud history of US intervention in opposition to the Armenian Genocide.
Sen. DURBIN: The definition of "genocide" is "the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group." Scholars agree that what the Armenian people suffered in 1915 to 1917 fits the definition of genocide. To date, 19 countries and 37 US states recognize the Armenian Genocide. Genocide is wrong. It is evil. It is evil whether its victims are Armenians, Sudanese, Rwandan Tutsis, Cambodians or European Jews. Not to acknowledge genocide for what it is denigrates the memory of its victims. Recognition of genocide is part of the healing process. Official recognition will reaffirm our tradition of protecting the vulnerable and inspire us to not stand by and watch as genocide occurs in our time.
Source: Armenian Genocide Resolution (S.RES.106/H.RES.106) 2007-SR106 on Mar 14, 2007
Urge Venezuela to re-open dissident radio & TV stations.
Clinton co-sponsored urging Venezuela to re-open dissident radio & TV stations
WHEREAS for several months, the President of Venezuela, Hugo Chávez, has been announcing over various media that he will not renew the current concession of the television station "Radio Caracas Televisión", also known as RCTV, which is set to expire on May 27, 2007, because of its adherence to an editorial stance different from his way of thinking;
WHEREAS President Chavez justifies this measure based on the alleged role RCTV played in the unsuccessful unconstitutional attempts in April 2002 to unseat President Chavez, under circumstances where there exists no filed complaint or judicial sentence that would sustain such a charge under Venezuelan law;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Senate--
(1) expresses its profound concern about the transgression against freedom of thought and expression that is being committed in Venezuela by the refusal of the President Hugo Chavez to renew the concession of RCTV
(2) strongly encourages the Organization of American States to respond appropriately, with full consideration of the necessary institutional instruments, to such transgression.
Source: Radio Caracas Resolution (S.RES.211) 2007-SR211 on May 21, 2007
Call for Burma's junta to release political prisoners.
Clinton co-sponsored calling for Burma's junta to release political prisoners
WHEREAS Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi has dedicated her life to the peaceful, non-violent movement for democracy and reconciliation in the Union of Burma;
WHEREAS Aung San Suu Kyi and the National League for Democracy won a majority of parliamentary seats in Burma's last election held in 1990;
WHEREAS the State Peace and Development Council of Burma refuses to cede power and permit representative government and has detained Aung San Suu Kyi under house arrest for 11 of the last 17 years;
WHEREAS the ruling military junta has committed numerous, well-documented atrocities against the people of Burma;
WHEREAS Aung San Suu Kyi continues to promote peaceful dialogue and reconciliation despite mistreatment from the State Peace and Development Council;
WHEREAS the United States recognizes and supports the dedication and commitment to freedom demonstrated by Aung San Suu Kyi:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Senate--
(1) honors Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi for her courage and devotion to the people of the Union of Burma and their struggle for democracy; and
(2)calls for the immediate release of Aung San Suu Kyi and other political prisoners by the State Peace and Development Council.
Source: Aung San Suu Kyi Resolution (S.RES.250) 2007-SR250 on Jun 22, 2007
Develop a strategy to protect civilians in Darfur.
Clinton co-sponsored developing a strategy to protect civilians in Darfur
A resolution calling on the United States Government and the international community to promptly develop, fund, and implement a comprehensive regional strategy in Africa to protect civilians, facilitate humanitarian operations, contain and reduce violence, and contribute to conditions for sustainable peace in eastern Chad, northern Central African Republic, and Darfur, Sudan.
Source: Darfur Resolution (S.RES.76) 2007-SR76 on Feb 8, 2007
Let Ukraine & Georgia enter NATO.
Clinton co-sponsored including Ukraine & Georgia in NATO
Congressional Summary: A resolution expressing strong support for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization to enter into a Membership Action Plan with Georgia and Ukraine:
reaffirming support for enlargement of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to include democratic governments that are able to meet the membership responsibilities;
that NATO's expansion contributes to its relevance;
that Georgia and Ukraine are strong allies that have made important progress in the areas of defense and democratic and human rights reform;
that a stronger relationship among Georgia, Ukraine, and NATO will benefit those countries and NATO member states; and
that the United States should take the lead in supporting the awarding of a Membership Action Plan to Georgia and Ukraine.
Legislative Outome: Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent.
Source: S.RES.439 & H.RES.997 2008-SR439 on Jan 31, 2008
Condemn violence by Chinese government in Tibet.
Clinton co-sponsored condemning the violence by Chinese government in Tibet
A resolution condemning the violence in Tibet and calling for restraint by the Government of the People's Republic of China and the people of Tibet. Calls for:
a dialogue between the government of China and His Holiness the Dalai Lama on religious and cultural autonomy for Tibet within China; and
release of peaceful protesters.
Calls on the PRC to:
respect the right of the people of Tibet to speak of the Dalai Lama and possess his photograph;
respect basic human rights;
allow international journalists free access to China; and
provide a full accounting of the March 2008 protests in Tibet.
Urges that the agreement permitting the PRC to open further diplomatic missions in the United States should be contingent upon establishment of a U.S. government office in Lhasa, Tibet.
Sanction Mugabe until Zimbabwe transitions to democracy.
Clinton co-sponsored sanctioning Mugabe until Zimbabwe transitions to democracy
A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the political situation in Zimbabwe. Expresses the sense of the Senate:
supporting the people of Zimbabwe;
that the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission should immediately release the legitimate results of the presidential election and ratify the previously announced results of the parliamentary elections;
that President Robert Mugabe should accept the will of the people of Zimbabwe in order to effect a timely and peaceful transition to democratic rule;
that the U.S. government and the international community should impose targeted sanctions against individuals in the government of
Zimbabwe and state security services and militias who are responsible for human rights abuses and election interference;
that the U.S. government and the international community should work together to prepare an economic and political recovery package for Zimbabwe;
that regional organizations should play an active role in resolving the crisis; and
that the U.N. Security Council should support efforts to bring about a peaceful resolution of the crisis and impose an international arms embargo on Zimbabwe until a legitimate democratic government has taken power.
Source: S.RES.533&H.RES.1230 2008-SR533 on Apr 24, 2008
Click here for 1 older quotations from Hillary Clinton on Foreign Policy.