Clinton can afford Ireland a new role on world stage

ANALYSIS: After eight years of hard power and military boots on the ground, America is ready for soft power and the subtle art…

ANALYSIS: After eight years of hard power and military boots on the ground, America is ready for soft power and the subtle art of negotiation, and Hillary Clinton says she will draw heavily on the Clinton presidency's Irish experience in her new role as US secretary of state, writes Niall O'Dowd.

HILLARY CLINTON's new position as US secretary of state affords Ireland a unique opportunity to play a new role on the world stage.

The success of the Irish peace process has deep resonance with the former first lady, who says she continues to draw valuable lessons from the positive outcome. An early visit to Ireland will reinforce this message.

She may well seek to have the US government "bless" the protagonists and governments involved in the Irish peace process, and get them to play active roles in helping to bring together protagonists in other conflict situations.

READ MORE

While that has been done in an unofficial capacity in several conflict-torn areas, having the support of the US government would change the dynamic of such efforts and give the Irish experience a major boost internationally.

Taking calculated risks for peace was a feature of the old Clinton foreign policy. She herself cites bold moves, such as granting Gerry Adams a US visa in the face of withering criticism, as an example of how such a risk can pay off. In short, caution cannot always be the watchword when approaching conflict resolution.

She learned other lessons too. Among them is the successful use of US special envoys to help resolve conflict, beginning with Senator George Mitchell, but continuing through the Bush administration with Richard Haas, Mitchell Reiss and Paula Dobriansky.

Dobriansky's behind-the-scenes role in the recent deal between DUP leader Peter Robinson and Sinn Féin's Martin McGuinness has not been much commented on but, according to several participants, it was vital.

Clinton believes the Bush administration did not make use of such envoys in key trouble spots around the globe during his time in office. During her husband Bill's administration, such envoys were used far more widely and often with great success.

Richard Holbrooke, as a special envoy, played a key role in ending the Balkan wars through the Dayton Accords in 1995. Former national security adviser Tony Lake mediated the drafting of the Algiers agreement, ending the Eritrean-Ethiopian War in 2000. Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize because of his work as special envoy, ending simmering tensions between key Latin American nations and the United States.

In all cases, unofficial channels were often used to carry messages and achieve results. Special envoys have a broader remit, which allows them to take chances. In many cases economic special envoys can have a profound impact on job creation and US investment, and they allow for a far more holistic approach to solving a problem.

Clinton also knows that her husband often cites the back-channel meetings in Northern Ireland, which involved talking with the hard men on both sides, as necessary ingredients in creating a successful peace process. Northern Ireland, she says, is where she also learned that talking to sworn enemies is sometimes the only way forward.

Thus, special envoys shuttling back and forth between recalcitrant leaders in Pakistan and Afghanistan or smoothing the way for an exit from Iraq after the recent success of American ground forces there may well be on the drawing board in a new Obama administration.

Such a move would be in keeping with her clear desire to reintegrate US foreign policy with that of the rest of the world. After eight years of hard power and military boots on the ground, America is ready for soft power and the subtle art of negotiation once again.

Clinton knows that to conduct any successful diplomacy requires, at a minimum, that the US is respected once again around the globe. After years of rampant anti-Americanism abroad, she sees the urgency above all of restoring the US's good name in the world.

She cites as an example the US's popularity in Turkey during her husband's time in office, when support for her country there reached the 60 per cent level, especially after she and her husband visited an earthquake disaster site in Turkey during a visit in 1999 and pledged immediate US support for relief efforts. Nowadays, support for the US there is in single digits.

This new emphasis on soft power bodes well for the new administration and its expected charm offensive worldwide. Obama's genius may well have been to recognise that while opinions remain mixed about Clinton at home, she is among the most popular US figures worldwide and brings a reservoir of enormous goodwill with her wherever she travels.

As George W Bush has proved to be the most unpopular US president abroad ever, the new administration will need all the star power it can muster to turn the tide. She will need all that wattage.

With domestic woes sure to anchor Obama to US shores for a considerable time, having a highly respected diplomat as his representative worldwide is clearly good politics.

As first lady Clinton visited 82 countries, so she hardly needs any introduction to the world. Yet Ireland continues to have a special resonance for her.

Clinton will also use her incredible network of ethnic support in the US to help smooth the way to conflict resolution.

During her campaign, ethnic groups such as Irish-Americans, Indian-Americans, Pakistani- and Turkish-Americans flocked to her banner, giving her powerful leverage with such groups now that she is secretary of state. She envisages turning that support into a concrete diplomatic advantage.

She cites the example of the early Irish-American support for the Irish peace process and Jewish-American support for Middle East progress as key ingredients in finding ways forward in both conflicts.

She foresees a place for talks between leaders of Irish America with Indian-Americans, Pakistani-Americans and Turkish-Americans to recount how they achieved progress. She believes such talks can create a powerful lobby for conflict resolution and possibly a road map as to how it can be achieved. She believes that ethnic support in the US for US policy can help shape reaction to a policy initiative among leaders back in the homeland.

She is scathing about Bush's lack of intellectual curiosity, and his failure to ever mix with ordinary people when he went abroad.

It is likely that as part of Clinton's job she will reach out to ordinary citizens in the countries that she visits and smooth out the harder edges that have become evident during the Bush era.

In the end, as former secretary of state James Baker has stated, her success will depend on her having complete access to President Obama, so that she is unmistakably speaking for him when she meets foreign leaders.

That does appear likely. Unlike the public perception, Clinton does not bear long-term grudges, especially if they get in the way of political expediency.

In the senate, for instance, she worked closely with Lindsay Graham, a Republican senator who, when he was a congressman, was one of those who led the impeachment battle against her husband. Many of her colleagues in the senate voted to impeach Bill Clinton, but she nevertheless developed good working relationships with them.

There is no reason she cannot do the same with Obama. He seems so self-assured and confident that it is unlikely that her superstar status will affect him. For her part it is a brave new world and a bright new challenge, which has already re-energised her after the brutal campaign. It is in neither person's interest that they fail to get along, and when it comes to the Clintons at least, enlightened self-interest will trump all.

Niall O'Dowd is founder/publisher of Irish Voice newspaper and Irish America magazine. He was a member of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign finance committee