Secy Clinton: moving beyond Rice's talking-points style

INTERNATIONAL: "Reshaping Diplomacy By Tossing The Script," by Mark Landler, New York Times, 21 February 2009.

ASIA: "American diplomacy in Asia: Hillary says hello to Asia; A well-received first trip abroad as secretary of state, listening not lecturing," The Economist, 21 February 2009.

I must admit: I have no problems so far with Clinton as SECSTATE. I like the style and substance and the stepping-up-to-the-historical-moment vibe.

I also like the honesty and the ability to move beyond Rice's painful bureaucratese.

Rice was a pretty picture all right, but there was no there there.

Clinton is a story a thousand times more interesting, and there is a surfeit of there there.

I simply like the gravity created. It's like we have a real SECSTATE again for the first time since Baker--a figure to be reckoned with versus one to be trifled with.

And the listening shtick--an oldie but goodie for her--is just what the doctor ordered

Comments

[Louis Heberlein]

Just remember it was a young Rice that provided Reagan administration with analyses to trust Gorbachev's character, motives, and competence. Whether she was the innovator, or the agent of an older administration character whose past was too jaded to make the proposal is unclear.

As far as her bureaucratese, haven't we had some of that style dealing with significant economic matters during Obama administration?

[Tom Barnett]

Louis, you're overselling here. Nancy's influence and those of outside Sovietologists (Ulam, Massy, Pipes) were the difference.

Crediting Rice is a rewrite I've not seen anybody sell with conviction.