Bringing balance to American foreign policy

Even before taking office, Hillary Clinton has begun strengthening the U.S. State Department, says the IHT. In addition to her intentions to increase the role of special envoys in American diplomacy, Clinton also hopes to expand her organization’s financial resources.

All good moves.

To date, the balance between force and diplomacy has been heavily skewed in favor of the former. Since 2003, the U.S.’s defense budget has surged by nearly 70 percent, according to the OMB. Over the same period, the budget for the State Department rose just 33 percent. The discrepancy becomes even clearer when we start looking at raw numbers. In FY2009, State expects to spend about $38 billion, whereas Defense will receive upwards of $515 billion.

To be fair, the military’s operating costs will always probably be higher thanks to expensive weapons development programs and the like. But such a large disparity in funding (nearly $480 billion!) is mindblowing. At the very least, it’s plausible that State could benefit from additional resources. Going even further, it might be worth arguing that this imbalance between political and military priorities should be corrected.

Imbalance has created disorder and inefficiency. A smart-power approach would restore the balance and see State and Defense working in concert and as equals. Neither organization is perfect in itself, which is why they need each other. It’s telling that the nation’s top security administrators are in agreement on that point:

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussions were private, said Clinton was being supported in her push for more resources by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Obama’s incoming national security adviser, General James Jones Jr.

For years, some Pentagon officials have complained that jobs like the economic reconstruction in Afghanistan and Iraq have been added to the military’s burden when they could have been handled by a robust Foreign Service.

Clinton’s effort to expand the State Department’s power promises not only to lift a burden off the military’s shoulders, but also to give a much-needed injection of soft power balance to a sluggish U.S. foreign policy.

Gates to remain SecDef in ’09. Awesome, though not unexpected

Source: http://graphics8. nytimes.com/images/2008/11/26/us/gates190.jpg

Robert Gates is to stay Secretary of Defense under the new Obama administration, reports the NYT. Smart move. Not only has Gates steered the U.S. towards a more moderate approach to national security since taking office; he also has a good grasp of the big picture. He’s overseen many of the improvements that have taken place recently in Iraq, wants to see a multilateral solution to Iran and would like to be proactive about Israel-Palestine.

Critics are generally worried about the implications for domestic politics Obama’s choice will have. I’m not that concerned. Gates’ personal politics are centrist, as far as I can tell, and while some say the people now surrounding him could become a bad influence, it’s not clear that they have been so far. Gates is his own man.