In the Arena
Uncategorized

Hill to Iraq

By Joe Klein | @JoeKleinTIME | March 17, 2009 | +

I’ve been a bit reluctant to jump into the mini-controversy over the pending appointment of Christopher Hill as Ambassador to Iraq. My son was Hill’s personal assistant during part of his tenure as Assistant Secretary of State. But I’ve been admirer of Hill’s since I first met him back in the 1990s, when he was assisting Richard Holbrooke on the Bosnia negotiations and I would have been disappointed in John McCain, Lindsay Graham and Sam Brownback for their transparently political opposition to the Hill appointment in any case.

But enough about me. Hillary Clinton makes the case for Hill eloquently during this recent press conference:

QUESTION:  Madame Secretary, how do you respond to criticism from Senators McCain and Graham and Brownback that Chris Hill is – does not have the experience necessary to become ambassador in Baghdad? He doesn’t have the experience in the Arab countries.  And they also allege that he doesn’t have the negotiating skills necessary, and they point to the recent deadlock in the negotiations with North Korea as an example.
 
SECRETARY CLINTON:  Well, obviously, I think both of those criticisms are unjustified and unfounded.  Chris Hill is a distinguished, experienced diplomat who has served in some very difficult positions on behalf of our country.  Another very distinguished, experienced diplomat, John Negroponte, was our ambassador to Iraq.  He did not have Middle East or Arabic language skills when he was sent to Iraq. I believe the people you’ve just mentioned, my former colleagues, all voted for former Deputy Secretary Negroponte.  So I think on the experience basis, he is not only very well-qualified in terms of running a large embassy, helping to deal with the myriad of issues that will arise as we conduct our withdrawal, but we’ll have around him, as any ambassador does, people who have particular skills and expertise.
 
With respect to the North Korean mission that we believe Ambassador Hill carried out with great persistence and success despite some difficult challenges, this is a hard set of challenges to meet.  And it is our perspective that he made a lot of lemonade out of some pretty bad lemons, and he was able to get the North Koreans on record as agreeing to certain obligations.  We now have to follow through on those obligations.  
 
So our assessment, which we believe is rooted in the facts, may be different from those who, you know, are rightfully distressed with and extremely critical of North Korean actions on human rights, on their continuing effort to obtain nuclear weapons, on their belligerence and their provocative actions.  But that is something that is not in any way reflective of the job that Chris Hill did in the Six-Party Talks, where we think he did a very good job.
 

Related Topics: Uncategorized

  • Latest on Swampland

    Image: Mark Halperin interviews Mitt Romney
    Mitt Romney May 23, 2012

    Romney Defends Bain Record, Hits Obama on Economy: ‘He Just Doesn’t Have a Clue’

    Mitt Romney lashed President Obama’s economic stewardship in an interview with TIME’s Mark Halperin on Wednesday, deflecting attacks on his years as a private equity executive and laying out how he hopes to take control of the economy as soon as he’s sworn in, should he defeat Obama in November.

    From our Partners

    Lewis Eisenberg, Major Romney Donor, Accuses Obama Of Demonizing Wall StreetHuffPost Politics

    Image: Presidential candidate Mitt Romney
    Mitt Romney May 23, 2012

    Mother of Mitt: How Lenore Romney’s Failed Campaign Shaped the Presumptive Republican Nominee

    This week’s TIME cover story, “The Mother of the Mitt Campaign,” tells the tale of how Lenore Romney’s 1970 run for U.S. Senate may have made a bigger impression on the Republican presidential candidate than his years spent as the son of a governor. Mitt’s father lost his own presidential bid, but it was the lessons from his mother’s loss that are more instructive as Romney enters the campaign stretch.

  • sevenoaks07

    Joe: in Mccain and Graham you have a fine pair of windbags. For them all politics is personal. So look for some incident when Hill rebuffed them These “Senators” are unforgiving, vindictive and thoroughly unpleasant when they are rebuffed.

  • Tom in The Swamp

    Madam Secretary neglects to mention that unlike John Negroponte, Christopher Hill doesn’t have any experience in forming and supporting government-sponsored death squads. Negroponte was able to draw on that experience he gained in Honduras and El Salvador when he introduced the practice in Iraq. I’m sure he found that experience invaluable.
    .
    Christopher Hill has no such relevant experience.
    .
    Fortunately.

  • stuartzechman

    Joe Klein:
    .
    “I’ve been a bit reluctant to jump into…”
    .
    I think recusing yourself from at least further public commentary is in order, actually.
    .
    Not every appointee has the benefit of defense from writers with access to forums sponsored by the likes of Time-Warner, Joe Klein.
    .
    Even if you have the best of intentions, this is hardly contributing to a level playing field, is it?

  • pearlybaker

    Is Chris Hill ready to sponsor death squads like Negroponte?

  • http://elvisberg.wordpress.com Elvis Elvisberg

    Sponsoring death squads is awfully Serious. Just like torture.
    -
    I dunno, Stuart. I see your point… but Joe’s always been very up front about his personal connection. If he turned his column in Time into a pro-Hill propaganda outlet, then no disclosure could purge the taint, but I don’t see any problem with an occasional post on the guy.

  • http://www.hulagate.org hulagate

    Another weak pick, by a weak administration, by and for weak thinkers.

    And Comrade Clixon IS the last person on the planet that should be endorsing anyone’s nepotism, given her SPASTIC performance in front of the Old Euros last week.

    Move On indeed.

  • http://www.hulagate.org hulagate

    THIS JUST IN: Al Franken announces 2016 VEEP nominee…

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090317/ap_on_re_us/sla_olson

    = AYERS ACCOMPLISHED =

  • http://www.hulagate.org hulagate

    “…this is hardly contributing to a level playing field, is it?”

    YOU THINK NOT?

    Good grape.

  • southernbell49

    Joe, I appreciate your post very much.

    The reason I finally stopped reading Politico was after some stupid speculation that the Obama administration was marginalizing HRC and that’s why there were special envoys.

    There was no analysis at all that perhaps there was a reason there were special envoys to deeply troubled regions and that having these “specialists” allowed HRC a lot more scope to do some backroom diplomacy.

  • http://www.hulagate.org hulagate

    Hillary Clixon, genius of Kosovo, martyr of Rwanda, air marshal of the Balkans, verbal knight of the Italian peninsula…

  • FlownOver

    I’m with Elvis here. Klein’s acknowledgment of his connection satisfies me. I’m not sure a level playing field is always the objective. “Level” for its own sake, above accuracy and all other considerations, is what gives us so much false equivalence mischaracterized as objectivity.
    .
    Opinion properly identified, along with accurate reporting of others’ positions, is not only fair but welcome. It stands in sharp contrast to regurgitation of unknown sources’ talking points presented as factual reporting (and you know who I’m looking at here.)

  • http://www.hulagate.org hulagate

    What happens when you think like Klein and act like Obama…

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20090317/ts_afp/russianatomilitarynuclear

    = NEVILLE CHAMBERLITES ACCOMPLISHED =

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    Hulagate reminds me of the guy who shot the trick-or-treater through his front door.
    .
    Never happy unless he’s afraid…..

  • stuartzechman

    I’m not sure a level playing field is always the objective.
    .
    I’m not sure that I’m making myself clear.
    .
    The point I was getting at is that each person, each individual should have the same shot at getting confirmed to post for which they are qualified, regardless of family connections to those with big media megaphones. If we don’t insist on connected or interested journalists recusing themselves from commentary on appointees, won’t there be an incentive for any given administration to appoint the most defendable, i.e. the most media-connected person as part of normal political calculations? Won’t a smart, tough vetting staff begin a search for candidates with a preference for those who may have advocates like Joe Klein?
    .
    The appointee who doesn’t have friends in high press corps places would then be at a comparative disadvantage in the consideration and vetting process –just getting in the door– even prior to their disadvantage during the confirmation process. That’s what I mean by “a level playing field”.
    .
    I am very satisfied with Joe’s scrupulous transparency, and he should obviously be highly commended for it, given the foul, rank nepotism infecting Versailles that goes largely unremarked upon by the Villagers. I am not in any way disparaging his disclaimer –far from it.
    .
    I’m unconvinced that transparency is enough to combat all the pernicious tendencies of the incestuous Beltway political-media class, however, when the public relations advantages conferred on connected appointment candidates seem so…obvious.

  • sqr1

    I think recusing yourself from at least further public commentary is in order, actually.
    .
    If only that was the standard. I don’t think Klein needs to recuse himself, but imagine if that was actually the rule. Imagine if all pundits were ethically bound from pontificating about political players to whom they have social connections.
    .

  • sqr1

    BTW, the only flaw in Hillary’s statement was in attributing good faith to McCain, Graham and Brownback: “our assessment … may be different from those who, you know, are rightfully distressed with and extremely critical of North Korean actions on human rights, on their continuing effort to obtain nuclear weapons, on their belligerence and their provocative actions.”
    .
    Please. Their assessment is rooted in scalping Obama appointees. No more. No less.
    .
    You know, it isn’t necessary to tell Republicans to go f— themselves, a la Cheney. But characterizing your political opponents — truthfully — as shameless political opportunists is rarely a bad idea when they are standing in your way.

  • plukasiak

    You know, it isn’t necessary to tell Republicans to go f— themselves, a la Cheney. But characterizing your political opponents — truthfully — as shameless political opportunists is rarely a bad idea when they are standing in your way.
    _
    Clinton made it abundantly clear that McCain and Brownback were shameless political opportunists when she brought up Negroponte….

blog comments powered by Disqus