A great person does something game-changing, and Clinton has not cleared that bar.
Just days after stepping down as the secretary of State, Hillary Clinton has already launched a rather presidential-looking website. The move to build 2016 speculation atop her triumphant exit from Foggy Bottom comes as the effusive praise for her tenure there is dying out. But will that praise hold up in the years until presidential politicking begins anew? That's doubtful.
On 60 Minutes Jan. 27, President Obama said Clinton "will go down as one of the finest secretaries of State we've had." The New York Times has called her a "rock star diplomat." Google Chairman Eric Schmidt said she was "the most significant secretary of State since (Truman-era secretary) Dean Acheson."
To her credit, Clinton managed her department well and worked tirelessly to implement Obama's foreign policy vision. She was a team player under a leader who landed the job she expected for herself. But this alone is not enough. Competently executing her duties is just what is expected. Even being consistently above average is true of any B student. A great person does something game-changing. Clinton has not cleared that bar.
Not one of the greats
The great secretaries of State include founding diplomat Thomas Jefferson, who established the office and managed the complex diplomacy of keeping the young United States out of a global war between France and Britain. John Quincy Adams, who served for eight years in the early 19th century, formulated and institutionalized the Monroe Doctrine, which was the basis of U.S. foreign policy for almost a century.
George C. Marshall, who had been Army chief of staff during World War II, served as Harry Truman's secretary of State for only two years, but in that time he helped create the bedrock containment policy of the Cold War, promulgated the Truman Doctrine of assistance to countries at risk of falling into the communist orbit, was instrumental in creating NATO and oversaw the Marshall Plan to rebuild post-war Europe. His successors Dean Acheson and John Foster Dulles are credited among other things with solidifying and expanding the structures that Marshall put in place. And Henry Kissinger, who served from 1973 to 1977, cooled Cold War tensions with the Soviet Union, reshaped policy in Asia as China began its rise, and helped stop a broader Middle East war in 1973.
Clinton does not belong on this bipartisan list.
In her tenure, she established no precedents or doctrines, made no fundamental diplomatic breakthroughs and concluded no significant peace agreements. The recent U.S. diplomatic opening to Burma was a noteworthy accomplishment, but not one that will affect the strategic balance or revolutionize international trade. It does not compare to the rapprochement with China spearheaded by Kissinger in 1971, or Commodore Matthew Perry's visit to Japan in 1853. Clinton did not receive the Nobel Peace Prize, unlike prior office holders. Her secretaryship was stable, energetic and mostly blunder-free, except the deadly Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, Libya. This does not add up to greatness.
Where are we now?
Clinton labored under the excessive expectations that accompanied Obama into office. Much more was promised than could reasonably have been achieved.
U.S. diplomats envisioned a "grand design" for settling differences between Afghanistan, Pakistan and India, a "grand bargain" to resolve the crisis over Iran's nuclear program and settle the outstanding issues among Israel, the Palestinian Authority and the neighboring Arab states. But these efforts soon collapsed, leaving Clinton to focus on smaller, more manageable elements of the issues. Talks on a climate agreement failed. The "reset" with Russia did not work out as planned. North Korea still threatens the U.S. with nuclear weapons, and the Middle East is increasingly in turmoil. "Smart power" turned out to be neither. And the most significant Obama administration overseas accomplishments, such as progress on terrorism, were achieved by the Department of Defense and the intelligence community, not Foggy Bottom.
Clinton's backers do her no favors by trying to enshrine her in the pantheon of great secretaries of State. They would better serve her by maintaining a sober perspective on her four years. They should settle on adjectives such as creditable or admirable. Clinton did a pretty good job in a trying time. Let's leave it at that.
James S. Robbins is a senior fellow in national security affairs at the American Foreign