Apart from considering another trip to Ireland, before or after the referendums, President Clinton is currently finalising the details for possibly the most significant trip of his second term in office. Next month he visits China. He gave it a wide berth during his first term, just as his predecessor, Mr George Bush, did from 1989, the year of the Tiananmen Square democracy protests which were crushed so brutally. Mr Clinton now feels that, nine years on, there may be a better chance of influencing China's attitude to human rights through increased contact.
And he may be right. However, last week's visit to Beijing by Ms Madeleine Albright, Mr Clinton's Secretary of State, which was to pave the way for the presidential trip, ran into a brick wall on the subjects of trade, missiles and, in particular, human rights. Ms Albright left empty-handed. Mr Clinton will need to do better.
The Chinese government looks forward to Mr Clinton's visit greatly. Tiananmen Square gave rise to some serious US sanctions against China and the Prime Minister, Mr Zhu Rongji, needs to have them lifted. Washington has encouraged Mr Zhu to think that they might be. Last autumn, the White House pushed out the boat for the State trip to Washington by President Jiang Zemin. China too played its part with gestures. Just after the trip it released one of the most prominent pro-democracy activists, Mr Wei Jingsheng, from custody. Two weeks ago Mr Wang Dan, another leader of the student protests, was let go.
There are indications that the government of President Jiang is genuinely prepared to allow a degree of dissent. Academics of liberal persuasion seem to be free to expound policies contrary to that of the government. The arch-conservative, Mr Li Peng, who as prime minister in 1989 declared martial law, has suggested that the media should be free to criticise government failures. But Beijing is not is on the threshold of a political thaw of consequence. The government has embarked on economic reforms aimed at making the enormous state sector efficient. This means job losses on a vast scale. An era of economic turbulence and high levels of unemployment is not the appropriate time, the government would argue, to ease up on political control - if indeed there is ever an appropriate time.
For the people of Tibet, that time might never come. Ms Albright was told that China has no intention of reopening talks with representatives of the Dalai Lama, Tibet's exiled spiritual leader. But Tibet is an issue which Western nations will not - and should not - relinquish. This month the EU will send its first delegation to Tibet and that will be followed by a visit from the the UN Commissioner for Human Rights, Mrs Mary Robinson. Tibet is not just on the western world's list of grievances against China, it is at the top of the list.
Mr Clinton is right to argue that if China is drawn further into the international community, then it might respond by moderating its position. Mr Clinton, however, ought not to take much on trust. China expects that Mr Clinton's visit will result in a lifting of trade and investment bans. But China will also hope that Mr Clinton will lift the ban on sales of military and "crime control" equipment and on China's launching of US satellites. Concessions such as those will have to wait until China makes binding commitments on human rights, starting in Tibet.