Foreign experience?

[sweetcountrygirl]

I've looked all over the place and I can't seem to find any information on any of the primarys foreign experience. It bugs me

I know that anyone could do a better job then bush on this but which primary would you say has the most experience? Experience can be interprecated (sp?) in many ways.

I was just wondering if anyone (Dean, Clark,ect.) have and *significant* experience with the foreign policy because it could really use some work. With the mess that bush is leaving, the us is going to need someone who is 100% dedicated to this to repair relations. Who would be best in this field?

I'm doing a paper right now about this and I'm just looking for opinions.

Has anyone of these been in a foreign country? Which ones? Met any influencial people (ie prime ministers, ect.)?

[everythingsxen]

1. Dunno about the others...

But I know Clark has at least seen Bosnia. ;-)

[jmaier]

2. LOL

I've been in a large number of foreign countries: serving, vacationing and working. I've also met quite a few influential political folks but I'd be a pretty crappy Sec. of State. I guess having traveled the world isn't really foreign policy experience.

Pretty clearly, the best credentials based upon experience versus positions taken are 1) Wes Clark and 2) John Kerry.

That said, all of the candidates have a better grasp on the essential issues than Smirky did when he campaigned in 2000.

[OrAnarch]

3. Many have been to other countries...

I remember Dean has traveled to a bunch. But that hardley counts for foreign policy, just as I think that being a Bosnian commander hardley counts for foreign policy. We can run around in circles and pretend being in foreign countries counts, but that is hardley the case. It is about formulating diplomatic strategies based in many ways on political philosophy. It doesn't take an ace to do such, but a well minded student in politics who is passionate and cooperative. This is one thing a rookie like Clinton excelled at with no prior experience. The best experience for such, IMHO, is governing in a larger context in some sense and striking compromise with states and countries external to one's immediate domain. People do not have to leave the US for that experience.

[jmaier]

4. Clark

wasn't a "Bosnian" commander, he was Allied Commander of NATO. I used to work with NATO in Brussels and it is NOTHING but a full time diplomatic job. Of course, SouthernCommand is another post where most of your time is spent negotiating with and cajoling a coalition of willing and unwilling allied nations.

I agree however that one's essential approach to foreign policy is just as important as hands on experience. That's why it's wonderful to have a candidate during these touchy times who has both.

[OrAnarch]

5. Excuse me...

I meant a commander in Bosnia (like a construction worker in Germany, a tourist in Australia, or anyone who does their job or function as normal in a foreign context). I know what he did but saving keystrokes...sorry. :)


It takes more than a visit or stay in a foreign place to learn how to formulate compromising diplomatic solutions between separate entities. That takes, but not requires, political governing experience to some degree and a well studied mind in politics and diversity too. Being to Europe in no way is any kinda litmus test for who could formulate the best, most diplomatic European trade or immigration policy.

[RandomUser]

9. Hardly

I meant a commander in Bosnia (like a construction worker in Germany, a tourist in Australia, or anyone who does their job or function as normal in a foreign context).

Clark was involved in negotiating treaties, crafting diplomatic agreements, talking with various foreign prime ministers and presidents to get them all together. He was involved in a lot more than just military stuff.

It takes more than a visit or stay in a foreign place to learn how to formulate compromising diplomatic solutions between separate entities.

Clark didn't just visit Europe to do his job. He was actively engaged and helped steer not just American policy in Europe, but the foreign policy of foreign nations in Europe. As a matter of fact, as SACEUR, he wasn't even subordinate to Cohen. SACEUR is not the same as any other position in the military. There is literally none other like it. Not only was Clark considered a Head of State (the equivalent of a presient or prime minister, conversing regularly with Blair and Chirac), he was dual hatted and his responsibilities were every bit about politics and diplomatic negotiations with foreign governments as it was about the military.

[LuminousX]

14. Out of curiousity - what treaties did Clark work on?

I find it questionable that work like that would fall to a military person. Or are you saying he worked in an advisory capacity on treaties? I'd still like to know which ones?

Obviously he's done nothing with trade, though. Or at least I'm assuming our military isn't setting U.S. trade policy.

[RandomUser]

18. He played a prime role in the Dayton accords

also, he was involved in the entire diplomatic negotiations process leading up the the war, as well as continuing concurrent with the war.

[OrAnarch]

21. didn't those fail...

"the entire diplomatic negotiations process leading up the the war"

...there was a war afterall. :)

[RandomUser]

23. The Daytons accords were prior ot him being SACEUR

The accords succeeded in keeping things stable for a while.

[Jackhammer Jesus]

19. From Clark's site:

"General Clark led the military negotiations in 1995 that led to the Dayton Peace Accords at Dayton, Ohio, leading to peace in Bosnia-Herzegovina."

That's all it says. I think I recall hearing him say he worked on the Dayton Accords themselves, but I'm not sure how he was involved.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

6. a though

i do believe that actually even visiting foreign countries is helpful in formatting foreign policy...atleast one is not such an isolationist as to not associate a face with a country...

[OrAnarch]

8. Disagree

Someone could be to every country in the world, but if their personality always has them operating under the "my way or the highway" idea, I do not think this exposure would count for much. IMO, what you remark on, about viewing nations without predisposed bias, it takes someone rather with an open mind. Although visiting could shape such a personality, such is not fully required. Such could be developed just from reading, visiting different areas in the US, etc. Getting beyond predujuices goes beyond a simple visit, and lies more in the character of the person and their willingness to negotiate.

[RandomUser]

10. The point is not the exposure

but the actual experience of crafting foreign policy and negotiating with both hostile and friendly foreign nations over treaty wording and diplomatic arrangements. And also working with domestic congressional delegations and agencies to steer foreign policy. Clark has done all of that.

[RandomUser]

7. The one with the most foreign experience is probably Clark

As J-5, he was in charge of creating global U.S. strategy.

He was part of the diplomatic mission with Ambassador Holbrooke, working on the Dayton accords negotiations in the Balkans.

During his time as CinC of the US Southern Command, he interacted with people all over South America.

Later, he was SACEUR, in charge of a multinational force composed of 19 nations. He had direct and personal contact with all the ambassadors, Heads of States, and Chiefs of Defense. Clark was given Head of State status, and is the only one of our candidates who had the right to contact and negotiate with any government at any time. He haggled over treaty wording, diplomatic horse-trading, defining joint international objectives in crafting policy. He oversaw a school, healthcare, and daycare system that spread across several countries.

He personally knows Chirac and Blair, having worked with them and all the other major figures in Europe in close quarters. He often had to negotiate, compromise, wheedle, demand, influence, and convince the various governments and agencies in order to get them to agree and work together.

As SACEUR and CinC of U.S. forces' European command, he was dual-hatted and the diplomatic bridge between two separate chains of command. Meaning he was part of both commands, but outside of both at the same time, giving him a degree of autonomy. He used his position in NATO to influence U.S. policy, and used his control of American forces to influence NATO policy. He was part of both and separate from both at the same time. As SACEUR, he did not take orders from the U.S. As CinC, he did not take orders from NATO. He had two separate staffs, two offices, two separate commands under him, and answered to two separate superiors.

He met with ambassadors, senators, congressional delegations from the U.S. and their equivalents in foreign countries. He worked with international humanitarian relief organizations in Europe.

I would suggest checking out the books he's written on the matter.

[OrAnarch]

11. hrm..

..and how much political philosphy has he read and practiced in such negotiations and meetings, or was he rather just following military protocol? Honest question (which will not be answered honestly probably). Was he involved in formulating diplomatic and political compromises between spearate entities, or rather military "solutions"? There is, in my opinion, a chasm of misunderstanding between the two. In no way would Clinton's experience qualify him to be the Supreme Nato Commander, just as a commander's experience wouldn't automatically qualify a person to be a president. But alas, everyone sees such the way they must for their own reasons.


It is sad this thread went from asking in general about such in regards to candidates to becoming a quest to prove Clark is the best of all.

[RandomUser]

16. I would suggest reading Waging Modern Wars

Clark was a Rhodes Scholar who got a Masters from Oxford in Philosphy among other things. Clark was no ordinary military grunt or a good ole boy military general. None of the other CinC positions are dual-hatted like the CinC Europe position. Thus no other general in the entire military is in the position that the CinC Europen Command is.

I always thought Clark was a general and had a purely military role until I read that book and realized who unique the position of SACEUR was.

Clark was keenly aware of the political dimensions and postulates that modern wars are every bit as much about politics (both domestic and foreign) as it is about actual tanks and soldiers. Congressional delegations from the U.S. went to Europe and consulted with Clark.

I agree with you that experience as a President would not necessarily qualify one to be a military General, just as experience as a military general would not necessarily qualify one to be a President. That is the point. SACEUR is not just about being a military general. It is a political and diplomatic position as well. The inherent nature of SACEUR is multilateral and part of an international organization, thus requiring consensus and negotiation between governments. SACEUR is not a position in the U.S. military, but rather one in NATO. Clark's American title was CinC European Command, not SACEUR. The NATO people actually got annoyed when there were a bunch of Americans at one of the change of office ceremonies, and pointed out that SACEURs served NATO and not America. The American forces in Europe were not under NATO command, but under Clark's command as CinC, while the European forces were under Clark's command as SACEUR.

The power Clark had and his sole bargaining chip was that he was outside both commands, and he used his position at each as a bargaining chip to shape policy in the other.

Often times, the allies would adopt different positions on the war, based on domestic politics and concerns. Each country wanted something different from Clark. And he had to negotiate with all of them, talking to the heads of states and ambassadors and their staffs, to keep the alliance from splitting apart. He not only negotiated for fly-over rights of states neighboring Serbia, but also had to negotiate with the Heads of States in those nations when they feel jittery or presented various concerns and demands to him.

[SahaleArm]

17. Dayton Accords - Holbrooke and Clark

http://www.state.gov/www/regions/eur/bosnia/bosagree.html

Not to mention direct negotiations with Milosevic while holding the position of SACEUR, a joint Euro-US position that basically is as much a dimplomacy post as it is a military post. Dealt with foreign heads of state on a regular basis.

[sandnsea]

12. Kerry/McCain normalized relations with Vietnam

Calls it his greatest accomplishment. He's attended almost every global environmental summit, usually as a personal choice. Wrote the Global AIDS bill which includes programs for immunizations, poverty relief, and other programs. Investigated and wrote on international crime, money laundering, drugs/guns and their connection to terrorism. Wrote legislation to counter it. Easily has as much foreign policy experience and knowledge as Clark. Either would be 1,000 times better than Bush.

[OrAnarch]

13. and it is sad...

..that he ruined much of that by voting for the IWR. I honestly think hes leaps and bounds ahead of Clark on what it really takes and true experience in related political matters, but he was tarnished by such a vote. Just my opinion BTW.

[Killarney]

15. Clark & Kerry

[Jackhammer Jesus]

20. No foreign experience thread could be complete

without a list of Clark's foreign awards.

"His Foreign awards include the Honorary Knight Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire (United Kingdom); Commander of the Legion of Honor (France); Grand Cross of the Order of Merit of the Federal Republic of Germany; Knight Grand Cross in the Order of Orange-Nassau, with Swords (Netherlands); Grand Officer of the Order of Merit of the Republic of Italy; Grand Cross of the Medal of Military Merit (Portugal); The Commander’s Cross with Star of the Order of Merit of Republic of Poland; Grand Officer of the Order of Merit of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg; Grand Medal of Military Merit (White Band) (Spain); The Grand Cordon of the Order of Leopold (Belgium); Cross of Merit of the Minister of Defense First Class (Czech Republic); Order of Merit of the Hungarian Republic; Commander’s Cross, The Silver Order of Freedom of the Republic of Slovenia; Madarski Konnik Medal (Bulgaria); Commemorative Medal of the Minister of Defence of the Slovak Republic First Class (Slovakia); First Class Order of Lithuanian Grand Duke Gediminas (Lithuania); Order of the Cross of the Eagle (Estonia); The Skandeberg Medal (Albania); Order of Merit of Morocco; Order of Merit of Argentina; The Grade of Prince Butmir w/Ribbon and Star (Croatia) and the Military Service Cross of Canada."

[OrAnarch]

22. Aren't these mostly military awards?

Honest question. If so, again, Im not buying what your selling.