The Clinton Doctrine is not an official government statement but an interpretation made by experts of the main priorities in the foreign policy of U.S. president Bill Clinton from 1993 to 2001.
Clinton statements Various speeches have been proposed as texts for a doctrine. Thus, in a February 26, 1999, speech, President Bill Clinton said the
following:
Clinton later made statements that augmented his approach to interventionism:
The interventionist position was used to justify U.S. involvement in the Yugoslav Wars. Clinton was criticized for not intervening to stop the Rwandan genocide of 1994. Other observers viewed Operation Gothic Serpent in Somalia as a mistake.
The Clinton administration also promoted globalization by pushing for trade agreements. The administration negotiated a total of around 300 trade agreements, such as NAFTA.Clinton on Foreign Policy at University of Nebraska Archived 2015-04-28 at the Wayback Machine Anthony Lake who served as National Security Advisor to Clinton between 1993 and 1997, showed the Clinton administration's commitment to accelerating the process of globalization in a speech given in 1993. The speech talked about enlarging the community of democracies around the world alongside expanding free markets.Haaas, Richard. N., 'Fatal Distraction: Bill Clinton's Foreign Policy', Foreign Policy 108(1997), p. 113.
National Security Strategy In Clinton's final National Security Strategy, he differentiated between national interests and humanitarian interests. He described national interests as those that:
Clinton's National Security Strategy provided Bosnia and Kosovo as examples of such interests and stakes. In contrast, it described humanitarian interests as those that force the nation to act:
The NSS also declared the right of the United States to intervene militarily to secure its "vital interests," which included, "ensuring uninhibited access to key markets, energy supplies, and strategic resources.""DEFENSE STRATEGY" U.S. Department of Defense, 1997
Historiography Historians and political scientists evaluated Clinton's immediate predecessors in terms of how well they handled the Cold War. A dilemma has arisen regarding what criteria to use regarding presidential administrations after the end of the Cold War.John Davis, "The dilemma: evaluating the first post-Cold War president." White House Studies 3.2 (2003): 183-200. Historians have debated, with inconclusive results, on the question of whether there was a consistent overall theme or schema to Clintonian foreign policy, or what scholars would call a "Clinton doctrine".John Dumbrell, "Was there a Clinton doctrine? President Clinton's foreign policy reconsidered" Diplomacy and Statecraft 13.2 (2002): 43–56. The Economist reported that Henry Kissinger echoed a frequent complaint when he characterized the Clinton foreign policy as less a grand design than “a series of seemingly unrelated decisions in response to specific crises.”See "The world beyond: America needs a design for foreign policy" The Economist Sept 30, 2000 John Dumbrell however notes that Douglas Brinkley and others have identified a Clinton doctrine in terms of systematic efforts to expand democracy in the world.Douglas Brinkley, "Democratic enlargement: the Clinton doctrine." Foreign Policy 106 (1997): 111-127 onlineKissinger himself also pointed this out. Henry Kissinger, Diplomacy (1994), p. 805. Other experts have pointed to the Clintonian emphasis on humanitarianism, especially when military intervention was called for.Dumbrell, pp 43-44. Democracy and humanitarianism represent the idealistic tradition in American foreign policy. Critics of Clintonianism have drawn upon the warnings of George F. Kennan, an exponent of the realist tradition. Kennan argued that idealism made poor policy, and according to Richard Russell, believed idealism that ignored the realities of power and the national interest would be self-defeating and erode American power.Richard Russell, "American diplomatic realism: A tradition practised and preached by George F. Kennan." Diplomacy and Statecraft 11.3 (2000): 159–182 at p. 170
Dumbrell also sees several other possible Clinton doctrines, including perhaps a systematic reluctance to become involved in foreign complications far from the American shore.Dumbrell, p 44. Dumbrell's favorite candidate is the explicit Clinton administration policy of warning "rogue" states on their misbehavior, using U.S. military intervention as a threat. He traces the origins of this policy to presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan, arguing that the Clinton administration made it more systematic so it deserves the term "Clinton Doctrine". However, Dumbrell concludes, it did not prove successful in practice.Dumbrell, pp 53-55.
See also Bush Doctrine Carter Doctrine Obama Doctrine Reagan Doctrine
References
External links
Further reading Bouchet, Nicolas. Democracy promotion as US foreign policy: Bill Clinton and democratic enlargement (Routledge, 2015). Brinkley, Douglas. "Democratic enlargement: the Clinton doctrine." Foreign Policy 106 (1997): 111–127. online Dumbrell, John. "Was there a Clinton doctrine? President Clinton's foreign policy reconsidered." Diplomacy and Statecraft 13.2 (2002): 43–56. online Meiertöns, Heiko. The Doctrines of US Security Policy - An Evaluation under International Law, Cambridge University Press (2010), . Søndergaard, Rasmus Sinding. "Bill Clinton's ‘democratic enlargement’and the securitisation of democracy promotion." Diplomacy & Statecraft 26.3 (2015): 534–551. online