Cox & Stokes: US Foreign Policy 
Monthly commentaries
Essay questionsCox & Stokes: US Foreign Policy
Statement of intent: Hillary Clinton's East Asia visit
The visit of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to Asia this February is significant in a number of respects. Most prominently the visit broke with the usual tradition for Secretaries of State to visit Europe on their first overseas trip, and the decision to instead visit Japan, Indonesia, South Korea, and China has been seen by many as a clear statement of priorities by the Obama administration. The trip suggests that the Obama administration is likely to give much greater priority to US-Asia relations in its foreign policy goals, with trade, the environment, and regional security all high on the agenda during the visit.
On the issues of the global financial crisis and climate change in particular, Clinton made it clear that these issues could not be addressed without close cooperation between the US and China. This drew criticism from human rights protestors, pro-Tibet campaigners, and pro-Taiwan groups in the US, but Clinton cautioned that '…our pressing on these issues can't interfere with the global economic crisis, the global climate change crisis and the security crises [of East Asia]; We have to have to have a dialogue that leads to an understanding and cooperation on each of those.' Although she courted controversy by attending a church service during her China visit, Clinton was also at pains to praise China's 'continuing confidence in United States treasuries', fully aware that China remains the world's largest holder of US government debts. Since the US and China produce 40% of the world's greenhouse gases between them, Clinton's meetings in Beijing also included initial discussion of the how the two states might tackle the issue of climate change.
The visit to Japan was seen partly as move to reassure Tokyo that US-China relations would not displace the traditional alliance between America and Japan, whilst the visit to South Korea came against a backdrop of increasing tensions in relations between Pyongyang and Seoul. Clinton reasserted the US commitment to denuclearization of the Korean peninsula amidst rumours of North Korean preparations to test-launch a new ballistic missile potentially capable of reaching Alaska. Persuading North Korea to return to the six nation nuclear talks will remain one of the primary challenges for the new Secretary of State, as will the management of relations between North and South Korea which have recently deteriorated over mutterings of 'preparations for war' by North Korean officials.
Clinton's Asia visit may well represent a shift in US foreign policy priorities in light of recent challenges such as the global financial crisis, as well as an attempt to renew efforts on several long-standing issues such as North Korea's nuclear capabilities. The prominence of the Secretary of State's visit is, however, possibly suggestive of a wider change of course by the Obama administration in terms of foreign policy, particularly with regard to the role of the State Department and the position of the Secretary of State.
The State Department was the first executive agency established under the Constitution in 1789, and its intended role can be loosely described as equivalent to that of a foreign office. In principle at least, the Secretary of State is the leading Cabinet Officer and foreign policy adviser to the President, and the primary original function of the State Department was to provide long-term planning on issues of international affairs.
On issues related to national security, though, the role has frequently been usurped or duplicated by the National Security Council staff and the National Security Adviser (NSA). In addition, the State Department has over time grown into a massive bureaucracy in its own right, employing some 9,000 diplomatic staff. As a result, Secretaries of State have often had to contend with the internal politics of managing Foggy Bottom (the area of Washington DC in which the State Department is located and the name by which 'State' is also frequently known) as well as having to contend with the battle for influence and resources among the various Executive agencies.
More recently the State Department has also endured fluctuating fortunes with regard its relative influence amongst the Executive agencies. During the first term of the George W. Bush administration, particularly over the issue of the Iraq invasion, the State Department and Secretary of State Colin Powell largely played second fiddle to the influence of the NSA, Condoleezza Rica, vice-president Dick Cheney, and the Pentagon under Donald Rumsfeld. As the Bush administration attempted to move away from unilateralism somewhat in its second term the appointment of Rice as Secretary of State was seen partly as an attempt to restore the State Department to prominence, although critics would argue that this was only partially successful as diplomatic progress on issues such as North Korea and the Arab-Israeli peace process was faltering at best.
With the selection and appointment of Hilary Clinton the State Department's profile looks assured and early signs are that Secretary of State Clinton is determined to restore State as the key agency of US foreign policy. How this might affect US capacity to deal with the challenges mentioned above remains to be seen.
Think Points:
How significant is the appointment of Hilary Clinton as Secretary of State?
How important is the State Department/Secretary of State in the formulation and application of US foreign policy?
Does Secretary of State Clinton's East Asia visit indicate a significant alteration in US foreign policy priorities?
What are the key foreign policy challenges facing the US in East Asia?
Should the US give greater priority to human rights issues in its relations with China?
Assess the prospects for peaceful denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.
View print version