Putting the Elements of Smart Power Into Practice
Remarks
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State, Secretary of State
En Route Seoul, South Korea
Seoul, South Korea
February 19, 2009
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Well, we're half way through our trip, and I just wanted to give you a
sense of what's next in Korea, and then I think we have time set for
tomorrow afternoon to get together to have a conversation as well.
We've
had kind of a two-day or two-country experience with what I believe are
the elements of smart power, if you look at the many tools for doing
both diplomacy and development, and for reaching out beyond
government-to-government relations to develop a better connection with
people in these countries. Because even authoritarian regimes are
interested in public opinion, and in democracies at whatever stage of
development, obviously, public opinion and people's attitudes about
countries influences the decisions that governments make.
So for me,
this is all of a piece. Indonesia was a particularly good example
because we did the government-to-government meetings with the Foreign
Minister and with the President, as well as the Secretary General of
ASEAN. We did the civil society gathering and visited the USAID project
and talked with Indonesian journalists in two different settings: the
show that's a combination of The Today Show and MTV; and the reporters
at the Ambassador's residence.
And I really believe that it's that
kind of outreach that we've got to do everywhere. Some settings are more
susceptible than others, but there's a real hunger for the United
States to be present again. I was so struck when the Secretary General
at ASEAN said that he thought that the United States had just been
absent. And showing up is not all of life, but it counts for a lot. And
especially when you are the most powerful country in the world, if
you're not paying attention, people are going to feel like somehow
they're not important to you.
And so now, in Korea, we'll be sort of
shifting to an emphasis on the security situation. I'll be starting my
morning with General Sharp and his Republic of Korean counterpart to
talk about the state of the military in South Korea, the plans for
moving operational control, the military assessment of the North Korean
actions. I'll obviously be speaking about that with the President and
the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister, as well as attending
another town hall at Ewha University, which is the largest women's
university in the world. And I think we're in one of their small
auditoriums, which has like 2,000 people. But it's a setting for more
dialogue and another kind of town hall question-and-answer opportunity.
I
think this is an especially important time for South Korea as they are
confronting a lot of worries about what's up in North Korea, what the
succession could be, what it means for them. And they're looking to us
to use our best efforts to try to get the agenda of denuclearization and
nonproliferation back in gear. So I'll be emphasizing that as we meet
with the government leaders.
But let me stop there and just kind of throw it open. And Robert's going to call on people so we don't leave anybody out.
MR. WOOD: Nick, Arshad, and then Glenn.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Okay. Nick.
QUESTION:
Thank you, Madame Secretary. I actually want to thank you for playing
along on that convoluted question last night at ASEAN, but I think – I
thought it was important to point out that it's not a Muslim outreach,
but it's the whole world.
So I'd like to ask you on the succession
issue that you just mentioned in North Korea. How much can you tell us
about U.S. plans or contingency plans? I know it's a sensitive issue,
but – and God knows the North Koreans don't need another excuse to
become even more provocative than they have been in the past weeks. But
the people in South Korea, I think, are interested in the matter and
would probably want to hear from you on that.
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Well, Nick, I think that our efforts have to be to number one, rebuild
the commitment on the part of the other members of the Six-Party Talks –
Japan, Russia, China, as well as South Korea and ourselves – into a
united front to, again, deal with the North Koreans. The Six-Party Talks
produced some results which we want to build on, but we are still
facing the reality of North Korea not only possessing, we believe, some
number of nuclear weapons, but showing very little willingness to get
back on track.
And – now, some of that is attributed to their own
internal situation, which I will discuss with the South Koreans. But I
think our goal is to try to come up with a strategy that is effective in
influencing the behavior of the North Koreans at a time when the whole
leadership situation is somewhat unclear. So you add to the already
difficult challenge of working with the North Koreans, the uncertainties
that come from questions about potential succession. This is a
difficult undertaking, but we are committed to it and we're going to be
engaged in it, and I'm looking to guidance from both South Korea and
then later in China about the best way to proceed.
MR. WOOD: Arshad.
QUESTION:
Can you sketch out for us or can you flesh out at all how you think it
may be possible to move the North Koreans, and whether, in particular,
you're going to be asking China to exert some of their influence or put
more pressure on the North Koreans despite the uncertainty about their
leadership?
SECRETARY CLINTON: You know, Arshad, I will better
be able to answer that after my meetings in Seoul and Beijing, because I
want to hear directly from both the South Koreans and the Chinese about
what they think the next steps are.
We obviously have some ideas,
but we do want this to be shared responsibility. We take a great deal of
responsibility because of our alliance relationships with Japan and
with South Korea because of our troops in both countries. But you know,
North Korea is on China's border, and I want to understand better what
the Chinese believe is doable. Chris Hill, who is with us, went to
Beijing before he joined me in Japan to begin those conversations. So
I'll have a better sense of it after I speak with them.
MR. WOOD: Glenn, and then Mark.
QUESTION:
Thank you, Madame Secretary. In terms of getting the Six-Party Talks
back on track, are you considering adding discussions about North
Korea's ballistic missile programs, you know, perhaps as, like, another
working group as part of the Six-Party Talks? And then also, isn't
China, South Korea and the United States beginning, as part of a
trilateral dialogue, a discussion of the potential succession issues in
North Korea?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Glenn, I think that the
ballistic missile discussion has to be pursued. Whether it's pursued as
part of the Six-Party Talks, as an adjunct, or as a separate track is
something I want to work through with our counterparts. But obviously,
with the attention being paid to the potential launching by the North
Koreans, this is, in and of itself, a matter of great concern. So it is
something that's on my agenda, again, to try to figure out what is the
most attractive option for the others as to how to proceed.
There was
talk about including the ballistic missile track in the past that
didn't come to pass, and I think that there is a pressing need for us to
figure out how we're going to engage on that. Now that doesn't mean the
North Koreans are going to engage, but we at least have to get our own
position in agreement so that we can approach the North Koreans. And the
conversations about the North Koreans go on all the time. I mean,
everybody is trying to read the tea leaves as to what's happening and
what's likely to occur.
And there is a lot of guessing going on, but
there's also an increasing amount of pressure because if there is a
succession, even if it's a peaceful succession, that creates more
uncertainty and it also may encourage behaviors that are even more
provocative as a way to consolidate power within the society. So we will
spend a lot of time – I will – trying to determine from the South
Koreans and the Chinese what their information is. Because obviously,
they have a lot of sources that they can share with us, so we're going
to have to try to feel our way forward here.
MR. WOOD: Mark Landler.
QUESTION:
Two questions, a bit unrelated if that's okay. The first is, since we
last spoke to you about the question of highly enriched uranium, there
have been these reports in the South Korean news media about a uranium
enrichment facility potentially being near Yongbyon, and I wonder
whether you could comment, whether you have any sense that there's
anything to these reports. That's the first question.
The second
question is an economic one. We're flying between two countries that
were both badly hurt by the Asian financial crisis. And at the time, the
U.S. remedy for them was very much to emulate the U.S. – deregulation,
rule of law, and an embrace of the free market. Now, both of these
countries, but particularly Korea, are suffering collateral damage from
our own economic crisis. So the question is: What message can you give
the Koreans this time around? Is it possible this time to say, "You need
to emulate us," or do we need to acknowledge that that may not be the
right idea?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Mark, on the highly
enriched uranium, we're always on the lookout for what the North Koreans
might be doing, and it is a matter of ongoing concern. But the point
that I made the other day, and that I underscore, is we know for sure
that they've reprocessed plutonium and produced fissile material. That
is of grave concern. And there's been such a concern on the part of some
about the highly enriched uranium program that I worry that they're
straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel. I mean, let's focus on what
they've done and how much easier it is to reprocess plutonium.
Obviously,
we're concerned, and as we move forward in the Six-Party Talks, if we
were ever at the point where we could create a verifiable and complete
agreement, it would clearly include highly enriched uranium. And the
inspectors and the other means for testing would be charged with
determining what, if anything, did exist.
With respect to the
economy Korea will be going to the G-20 in London. And I think it's very
important that the G-20 nations come out of that meeting with some
agreed upon framework that they intend to pursue. Some countries have a
larger load to carry than others, namely the United States, and that's
why President Obama is working so hard to get the stimulus package
passed, to get the housing proposal out there, to demonstrate that we're
not just pulling our weight, but leading the way in what we think is
the best approach to global recovery.
There may be internal national
considerations that any country has to look at. But trying to figure
out how to fence off and eliminate toxic assets from your banking system
to get credit moving again, to clean up any other kind of overhang,
whether it be a housing crisis or other challenge to your economic
well-being, individual countries are going to have to do that. But there
needs to be a global framework, and that's what we hope will be
hammered out at the G-20. And in this instance, it's not the United
States saying to somebody else, "You go do like we do." It's us saying,
"Here's what we're doing to clean up our own mess." And we think this is
an important moment for us all to act to do what we can.
Now, take
Indonesia. We just left there. They're still projecting a positive
growth rate of about 4.5 percent, which is pretty impressive given where
the contracting economies in the region are. But they're worried that
failure to act or other problems internationally can cut the legs out
from under them and cause them to become much more economically
unstable. So I think it's really important that this G-20 meeting come
out with specific action items so that people know what the direction is
that we're going to pursue.
MR. WOOD: One last question. Andrea.
QUESTION:
Madame Secretary, following up on Mark, in your visit so far, to what
extent have you found that our economic crisis has affected perceptions
of American credibility and American leadership? And in the coming
months and years, do you feel that you need to address beyond the
traditional mechanisms of public diplomacy, which many would argue have
really failed in the last – certainly in the last eight years- but you
have to come up with new ways of perhaps what you're doing now in going
beyond government -but new ways to assert American leadership and
restore respect for America abroad? You know, how damaged are we, and
how much anger do you feel out there?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Well, I think that people around the world are bewildered by what is
happening. And there is a certain expectation that the United States,
with our large, resilient economy, can recover and lead the way for the
rest of the world to recover, and that's why we're working so hard to
turn that expectation into a reality.
Some people are very critical
of the problems that we had. The economic crisis hit us first and hit us
very hard. But to some extent, we have more resilience than other
economies do. P people are still buying treasury bonds, even though they
don't have any return to speak of. And so everyone who's investing in
the American economy may be making the best bet they can on what they
think the future holds.
But it's really important that we do
everything within our power to demonstrate that people should have faith
and confidence in our decision making. And that's one of the reasons
the President worked so hard to get the stimulus package passed, so that
we could begin to get our recovery moving.
So I think right now,
people are just more nervous and scared. I just off the phone with Prime
Minister Rudd in Australia and he is one of many voices saying we've
really got to come together around this G-20 Summit and make sure we've
got a positive program. And I think it's incumbent upon the United
States to do everything we can to lead the way there, and that's what
we're trying to do.
Indira.
QUESTION: Thank you, Secretary
Clinton. On this smart power issue, I was really struck by the
appearance on "Awesome" and the civil society dinner and the town hall
in Tokyo. And in a lot of these places, you're being greeted as, you
know, they love you, it's effusive.
I'm wondering to what extent,
though, is it preaching to the converted? With these civil society
people, with the journalists who went to Emerson, these are people who
are already predisposed to be pro-American. So to what extent is your
smart power message getting out to those people in Indonesia or in
Tokyo, who aren't in the room and who don't already love the United
States and you personally?
SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Indira, I
think that every one of those events had a much broader audience.
Obviously, the Tokyo town hall was on Tokyo television. The program this
morning is one of the most popular programs in Indonesia. And so
everything that I do, which does connect with people who are receptive
has ripple effects. And Andrea said something about public diplomacy. We
haven't done a very good job. And we have such a great story to tell
about who we are as Americans and what we believe in and our desire to
help other people be empowered.
Some of you walked through that
neighborhood with me, I mean the United States aid programs, paid for by
American taxpayers, are hooking people up to clean water, for example.
And it's the kind of incremental change that if properly explained and
highlighted, can give meaning to what America is to people who may have
no opinion or a slightly negative opinion. We are in a struggle over
ideas. And one of the points that the civil society people were making
to me last night is that Indonesia is going to turn into a real
battleground for the future of democracy and Islam and women's rights.
And we need to be there. We need to be supporting the forces within
Indonesia who care deeply about all of those values.
And I think our
failure to engage on that level going back years, partly because we
didn't realize it was going on right underneath our noses, and then when
we did, we didn't exactly connect with the right messages for people in
a way that they accepted. So we've got a lot of work to do. I mean, I
have no illusions about how high a hill we have to climb here to inspire
confidence and respect in people's minds again.
But I have found
that in not only my personal encounters, but in every public research
survey I've ever read that anybody's ever done, that people still really
want to like America and they want to know what we're doing and what we
stand for.
And take Indonesia; because of the war in Iraq and some
other things, the attitude of people in Indonesia toward the United
States was very negative. And then the tsunami hit, and we helped. You
know, the United States showed up. The Navy showed up with supplies.
President Bush sent my husband and his father, and they were visibly
there, and then Bill went back time and again. And all of a sudden,
people said, "Oh, well, they don't need to do this, but here they are,
they're helping." And favorability toward the United States went up.
I
mean, in Africa, in some of the sub-Saharan countries, where the
favorability toward the United States has remained high, it's because of
President Bush's PEPFAR program, that "the United States is here to
actually do something good for us." So this to me is what diplomacy is
about, because it doesn't just operate, as I said,
government-to-government; it operates people-to-people. And when every
single person that I met with said to me they wanted more student
exchanges so that Indonesian students could study in the United States,
or the President would say, "I studied in the United States, "or the
Secretary General of ASEAN said, "I was an AFS student," – you know, for
a lot of people those were transformative events. And we kind of cut
back on that and we made it very difficult for people to get visas after
9/11, and so instead of coming to the United States, ambitious students
went elsewhere.
So we have to rethink this and try to get back on
the track of reaching out and being inclusive and giving more people a
chance to see who we are.
QUESTION: Thank you very much. If
we could just go back to Pakistan, which you said you didn't have enough
information the other day about the Islamic law in the Swat Valley, and
if you've gotten more information, if the confusion's gone, and what
you think of that?
And also, Afghanistan. And you say people really
want to like America. In Afghanistan, ABC did a poll recently – I know
the military has as well – looking at how people feel about Afghanistan
now who live there – I mean, about Americans who live there, and their
opinions have really plummeted. And one major reason is because the U.S.
hasn't been able to deliver aid or build on its promises. Obviously,
security is huge as well. Talk a little bit, if you will, about what you
can do differently. The President ordered more troops there yesterday,
but it's not just a military mission. Are you satisfied with the State
Department role? What can you do, how can you change it, how can you
make the aid there really work? And the Pakistan question.
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Well, we're doing a policy review on Afghanistan and Pakistan, and I'm
not going to preview it. But I can guarantee you that we're looking at
every single one of those questions. We did have the President order
17,000 more troops to Afghanistan, but that's only a part of what the
eventual strategy will be. And it is important that we understand how we
have to build – rebuild our position and our credibility, and figure
out to produce results for people. But we hope to have that review done
by the end of March, and we'll have more to say about it when it is
done.
With respect to Pakistan, our Special Representative Richard
Holbrooke and others are working with the Government in Pakistan to
understand exactly what they intend with their recent announcement and
how we're supposed to interpret it. So I don't want to say something
that might not be particularly useful until we have a clearer idea.
But
I'll just circle back and end with this: Part of the reason we're
having an Afghanistan-Pakistan review – and we've worked very hard to
get our allies on board and looking at both countries, not just at
Afghanistan, which took some discussion – is because we see them as
interconnected. And any decision in one affects our prospects and the
prospects of peace and stability in the other, so we are very aware of
the fact that we have to look at both of them. And we've asked that both
countries contribute ideas and personnel to our policy review, because
we want them to be part of what our eventual strategic assessment is
going to be. And they've both agreed to do that. So I don't want to say
anything other than that at this moment.
Thank you. Thank you.
QUESTION:
Is there any way to get one in on North Korea (inaudible)? Basically,
are you going with any idea of defusing the tensions that exist right
now? Is that important to (inaudible)?
SECRETARY CLINTON:
Well, you know, defusing the tension between North and South Korea is
always important, because we don't want it to spiral up. So I will talk
with the South Koreans about how we can try to rein in the unhelpful
comments from the North Koreans, or at least not respond to them, not
take the bait, so to speak.
But this is a pattern. You can go back
and chart it. And we're in one of those periods where there's a lot of
threatening talk coming from the North, and we just have to take it for
what it is and try to figure out how we're going to organize ourselves
to deal with them going forward.
Okay. Thanks, everybody.
# # #
