Advertisement

Opinion

Opinion

Opinion: Kerry is a good choice for State

December 16, 2012

Advertisement

— What kind of secretary of state would Sen. John Kerry make? That’s the question of the moment after U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice’s surprise decision Thursday to withdraw her name from consideration, making Kerry the likely nominee.

Kerry is a familiar figure to America and the world. He has been a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for nearly three decades. This very familiarity can seem something of a liability: the lean face, the patrician bearing, the status as a presidential also-ran. But the fact that Kerry is a known commodity, with a predictable, reliable persona, is one of his strengths.

Three qualities make Kerry a good fit for this moment.

First, he recognizes that the world is a mess, starting with the chaotic Arab nations, and that it needs stronger American diplomatic leadership. When the Arab revolutions began in 2011, President Obama rightly decided not to try to contain the explosion. But we’re entering a new period when Arabs need more U.S. help in consolidating their gains. Kerry, who has been traveling in the Middle East long enough to develop a genuine feel for the region, would be a good and steadying partner for the Arab transformation.

Second, Kerry appreciates the importance of quiet diplomacy, especially now. To make progress in brokering a Syrian political transition, exploring negotiating options with Iran and assessing prospects for Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, Obama will need a confidential emissary. Kerry has played that role successfully for him already, in Afghanistan and Pakistan. It’s hard for a secretary of state to operate in “quiet mode,” but Kerry understands that’s important now. He’s well-traveled enough that he could skip the get-acquainted tours.

Third, while Kerry sometimes comes across as stiff, he’s surprisingly willing to challenge conventional wisdom, especially about engaging America’s adversaries. This unlikely contrarian streak would be an advantage, especially because it’s so well disguised: With his stolid demeanor, Kerry would find it easier to take diplomatic chances than other potential nominees, especially the younger, less experienced Rice.

Kerry’s weakness is that, like Hillary Clinton, he lacks a close personal relationship with Obama. To understand the benefits of being a presidential confidante, think about the George W. Bush administration. Colin Powell was a distinguished, experienced soldier, but he couldn’t represent the president with the same authority as his successor, Condoleezza Rice, who had Bush’s ear. If Obama does what White House sources predict and nominates Kerry for State, the two will need to establish a better bond. Washington gossips report that Obama sometimes found Kerry long-winded during the hours of debate preparation when Kerry played the role of Mitt Romney. Maybe Obama and Kerry need to play basketball together, or go windsurfing, or just have a beer.

Over the past several weeks, I have been asking foreign-policy experts and foreign diplomats whom they favor for State. With the exception of White House officials and a few diplomats, my straw poll showed Kerry as the overwhelming favorite. Partly this reflects trust in Kerry; partly it showed wariness about Rice, who’s less well-known and has made some enemies. These comments may have reflected hidden biases against Rice, but there’s also genuine confidence in Kerry.

 Rice’s letter withdrawing her nomination was admirably blunt. The Republican campaign against her, centered on her role as administration spokesman about the Benghazi consulate attack, was, as she said, an “irresponsible distraction.” But she was also right that it would have created a “lengthy, disruptive and costly” confirmation fight. She did the unthinkable Washington thing, which was to put the country first and step aside.  

Perhaps the best thing about Kerry is that he’s safe. Sometimes it makes sense to choose a high-risk, high-reward candidate, which Rice would have been. But now isn’t one of those moments. The world is unsteady; America’s friends and adversaries need a reminder of its power and persistence. Ahead is the prospect of intense diplomacy with Iran, Syria, Egypt, Russia, Israel and the Palestinians.

Kerry may be that rare politician who is a late bloomer. The awkwardness many saw when he was the Democratic presidential candidate in 2004 is largely gone; he has the advantage of having been disappointed in life, losing the presidential race, getting passed over for vice president and secretary of state in 2008. He wants to lead the State Department now, not just in the sense that an ambitious person wants another life trophy but because he thinks he could do the job well. He may seem a conventional choice for State, but he could be a very successful one.

— David Ignatius is a columnist for Washington Post Writers Group.

Comments

Pal 2 years ago

Clinton is/was proof that the position no longer matters.

Liberty275 2 years ago

Kerry made mistakes in the past, but I can't think of a better person for the job.

Also, I think Hilary has done a fine job during a very difficult period. I wouldn't want to be a world leader on her list of people to tell what to do. She's facing a mid-east flareup and two countries we don't really get along with trying to become superpowers, and thanks to Ms Clinton we don't look like bullies while keeping them in check.

Susan Rice took the fall for a bad situation, a SNAFU sort of thing. She did her job the way we expected (because we don't ever expect dissension in the ranks during a crisis) even though it had to be obvious to her it would end her career, She took one for the team. Sometimes that's what Americans do.

Liberty275 2 years ago

Mostly America doesn't suffer dissension during a crisis. We have elections instead.

Ron Holzwarth 2 years ago

I can't think of a better person for the job either. And obviously, we can't all be prophets!

From: http://www.jewishpress.com/news/95902/2012/12/16/

WikiLeaks revealed that Kerry was pushing Assad as the man who could bring peace to the region.

Kerry agreed with the emir (of Qatar, Hamad bin Khalifa) that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is a man who wants change.

,,,he also pointed Assad’s arming of Hezbollah and interference in Lebanese politics, saying those were unhelpful. But Kerry said that Assad “needs to make a bolder move and take risks” for peace, and that he should be “more statesman-like.”

The bloodshed in Syria began about one year after that call for reliance on Assad for Middle East peace.

voevoda 2 years ago

If Kerry is wealthy, doesn't that fact prove that the Democrats aren't all moochers who are out to deprive rich people of their money? So thank you, WristTwister, for pointing this out and demonstrating the hypocrisy of ultra-right-wing rhetoric.

voevoda 2 years ago

How odd, WristTwister, that you would assume that every "democrat" would have inside knowledge of the Kerry family finances. If you try to use my posting as "confirmation" of your inference that Kerry married money, you will only show yourself to be highly impaired when it comes to research.

And PS--I didn't miss the point you were trying to make--to imply tax evasion. I just chose to ignore it. Isn't that the method of response you so often display yourself?

Liberty275 2 years ago

He just married a rich wife. Who wouldn't, given the chance?

Katara 2 years ago

It is Brownback's strategy for keeping women off of welfare. I don't see why it can't be a strategy to keep men off of welfare too.

Liberty275 2 years ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

Cait McKnelly 2 years ago

Of COURSE Kerry is perfect for the job. Because now he will have to vacate his Senate seat and there's the breath of a prayer the Republicans can take it. Maybe a 2% chance but by god it's a chance and the GOP needs any old port in a storm.

Patricia Davis 2 years ago

From Swiftboat to Secretary of State, these Repubs have defined hypocrisy. We all know it is a ploy to try to regain a senate seat.Don't fall for this President Obama. Nominate Huntsman, keep Kerry in the Senate. We need every democrat vote for the SCOTUS nominations coming up. Much for important than "Kerry's" sense of destiny.

jayhawkjohn71 2 years ago

"Peak efficiency in four years"? What about the food stamp program? 32 million on food stamps when Obama took office now 46 million. Will Obama get it back down under 32 million during the next four years? Not.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.