Will the Clinton tribe crowd out the Obama tribe at Foggy Bottom?

Posted By Daniel W. Drezner Friday, November 21, 2008 - 8:28 PM Share

Now that it appears that Hillary Clinton is going to be the next Secretary of State, the Trickle Down Panic is ensuing. Namely, if Ms. Clinton is the next SoS, will she be picking her own team to staff the senior positions? Spencer Ackerman, Greg Sargent, and Steve Benen have already written on this. Ackerman gets at the nub of the problem:

Some progressive Obama supporters think the arrival of Clinton at the State Dept. will mean they’ll be frozen out. That would have implications for their advancement in subsequent Democratic administrations. “Basically, you have all of these young, next-generation and mid-career people who took a chance on Obama” during the primaries, said one Democratic foreign-policy expert included in that cohort. “They were many times the ones who were courageous enough to stand up early against Iraq, which is why many of them supported Obama in the first place. And many of them would likely get shut out of the mid-career and assistant-secretary type jobs that you need, so that they can one day be the top people running a future Democratic administration.” In the foreign-policy bureaucracy, these middle-tier jobs — assistant secretary and principal-deputy-assistant and deputy-assistant — are stepping stones to bigger, more important jobs, because they’re where much of the actual policy-making is hashed out. Those positions flesh out strategic decisions made by the president and cabinet secretaries; implement those policies; and use their expertise to both inform decisions and propose targeted or specific solutions to particular crises. The responsibility conferred on those offices, and the expertise developed and deepened by their occupants, shape the future luminaries of U.S. foreign policy. Susan Rice, for example, served as assistant secretary of state for African affairs in Bill Clinton’s second term and is now a leading contender for a top job in the Obama administration. “These are your foreign-policy change agents,” said the Democratic foreign-policy expert.

Sargent names names:

Among the Hillary people you can imagine going with her to the State Department are old-guard types such as Richard Holbrooke, Jamie Rubin, and Michael O'Hanlon. While some of Obama's foreign policy advisers had served under Bill Clinton, Obama had plenty of fresher faces, such as Samantha Power, who during the campaign strongly condemned the Hillary "conventional wisdom" foreign policy mindset that might dominate should she be elected president.... The question is whether Hillary people at State will muddle what is arguably Obama's overarching foreign policy ambition: Fundamental change in the way national security is discussed in this country and a true and enduring transformation of our own views of what constitutes just and practical uses of our military power abroad. The dynamic bears watching.

As an outsider to this whole process, these concerns strike me as massively overlown, for a few reasons. First, as I said before, I'm not sure how much of a gap there is between Clinton and Obama on policy substance. This public but anonymous fretting has more to do with jobs than with policy positions. [UPDATE: See this Thomas P.M. Barnett post to get a sense of the inside-the-Beltway anxiety on this point -- or, click on this TNI online essay of mine from earlier in the month.] Second, I'm not sure how large Clinton's coterie will be. One of the problems her campaign had on the foreign policy side was an overreliance on senior policy advisors -- Madeleine Albright and Sandy Berger, to name two of them. They aren't going into the Obama administration. Clinton had fewer people attached to her to staff Assistant Secretary of State positions, so I don't think there would be a large crowding out effect (Holbrooke might go in as Deputy SoS -- but I'm not completely convinced that such an arrangement would work for either him or Clinton). Maybe Lee Feinstein will displace Samantha Power as Policy Planning director, but other than that there won't be much difference. Third, my hunch is that a lot of Obama's 300 will be headed to the National Security Council staff. Now, whether they have influence there depends largely on the relationship between Clinton and Obama, but the NSC is another place where future bigfeet start cutting their teeth. Disgruntled Obama-ites should feel free to comment/e-mail me if they think I misreading the lay of the land.

EXPLORE:POLITICS, U.S. FOREIGN POLICY, FOREIGN POLICY COMMUNITY, OBAMA, TRANSITION

(8)

HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE

APPALLED MODERATE

9:02 PM ET

November 21, 2008

Obama is going to have some

Obama is going to have some of his own people at state. I don't see his trusting Hillary enough to give her an entirely free hand.

MITCHELL YOUNG

10:01 PM ET

November 21, 2008

How can I join the Alaska

How can I join the Alaska Independence Party?

JOHNCHARLES

12:02 AM ET

November 22, 2008

Can't wait to get the answer

Can't wait to get the answer to that law question!

ED SMITHE

1:30 AM ET

November 22, 2008

It's not a question of

It's not a question of whether the two of them agree. And it actually has very little to do with her undermining the administration (either overtly or covertly). The real problem here is that Hillary Clinton and people like Michael O'Hanlon or Ivo Daalder or Ron Asmus (all of which will either have jobs or influence) are Wilsonian hawks that do nothing to move this country any closer to a bipartisan national security policy. What's worse, these guys collaborate with the neoconservatives on a regular basis...remember the 90s? There wasn't an intervention that the neocons didn't disagree with the administration on. I thought the democrats understood just how dangerous these guys were. Apparently they're as ignorant as the Republican party.

By ignoring disaffected Republican realists (or Obamacons as some have labeled them), the Obama camp has failed to divide the Republican national security apparatus. When the next terrorist attack occurs, he will face a neoconservative backlash that will accuse him as having weakened the nation. Considering the polls on national security, this line will certainly resonate--especially when there are no prominent Republican realists (read Chuck Hagel or Dick Lugar) to come to his defense.

This is a strategically disastrous decision that will cripple this administration and likely lead to an even more militaristic foreign policy (whether it is Obama trying to seem strong, or a neocon nut who takes over in 2012). Obama had the opportunity to create a new consensus in foreign policy that could have lasted beyond his Presidency. Instead, he has set himself up for certain failure. The Bard could not have written this tragedy any better.

JIM

4:14 AM ET

November 22, 2008

This all misses one of the

This all misses one of the points. Perception is reality, like it or not, and in the eyes of a good deal of his supporters, he just wound the clock back. Bringing on a woman with no demonstrated experience or competency in the job other than listening to advisors and then selecting an option. Didn't need Hillary for that. And the risks that come along with her and Bill. Yes, her and Bill. As Woodward said, you're on drugs if you think we're not in for the Bill and Hillary circus. I think there are a lot of blind observers of this charade.

EMMA

2:14 PM ET

November 22, 2008

I am amazed at how quickly

I am amazed at how quickly Obama supporters have decided that this pick means the end of all their hopes -- some are downright apocalyptic about it. So, the brilliant, controlled politician they elected will suddenly turn into Mr. Wimp under Hillary's magic power? I'm no friend of Hillary, but I refuse to believe Obama didn't think things through before doing this.

Also, the Bill and Hillary circus? Driven by the media and we are buying into their spin. All that effort to free ourselves from the MSM and now we are helping them do their destructive best.

OTTOVBVS

5:36 PM ET

November 22, 2008

You have to laugh at all

You have to laugh at all these pocket Metternich's and Bismarks commenting on Clinton as SOS. And you thought all the conspiracy nuts were to be found on the far right of the Republican party or at the Church of Scientology. I assume most of them come from kids or people who haven't run a pretzel stand but in terms of maturity and understanding of how the world works that what they sound like. Juvenile. He's obviously offered her the job, after some agonizing and the vetting process playing out, she's obviously accepted but they don't want to step on the far more important at this precise moment economic appointments which are going to come out on Monday. Really it's time some of you folks grew up, this is running the govt not eighth grade.

ZATHRAS

2:53 AM ET

November 23, 2008

The last post on this thread

The last post on this thread does make the important point that from here through at least the next year or two the most important Obama administration appointments will be those in the economic areas, starting with Treasury Secretary and moving down from there.

Apart from that, though, the idea advanced here that mid-level appointments are crucial and might affect the future direction of foreign policy is true as far as it goes, which is to say as long as Sen. Clinton remains Secretary of State. She might run aground or be sidelined as Powell was and still serve out a full four year term, but historically this has been more the exception than the rule. I continue to think that sending Clinton to State is an extraordinarily bad appointment that President-elect Obama will regret having made -- but after Jan. 20, 2009 he will be President, and will at some point in the next four years have an opportunity to correct it. It won't be a great opportunity, given that if Clinton refuses to resign a large number of Democrats will be furious if Obama fires her. But as to the mid-level jobs, all that has to happen is for Clinton to leave in mid-term, and the churning down in the bureaucracy can begin.