The Return of Hubris

Stephen Walt takes a refreshing break from the Israel-Gaza war to take a swipe at Hillary Clinton:

Nonetheless, Clinton's remarks were not those of someone eager to make choices or set priorities, even though she deployed clever new concepts like "smart power." Clinton did not say which of these problems merited the most resources or the most immediate attention, which problems were the most easily solved and which might be intractable, or how the United States might deploy its power strategically, so that our actions in one area made solving other problems easier, instead of operating (as we often do) at cross-purposes.

It was an impressive performance in some respects -- she's mastered her brief, showed admirable poise, and made it clear that she's on the same page with the president-elect. But taken as a whole, her testimony was entirely consistent with the well-engrained tendency for great powers to assume that what happens anywhere matters everywhere, and especially matters to them. I'm no isolationist, but it would be refreshing to hear a more rigorous assessment of our vital interests and a clearer acknowledgment of the limits of U.S. power, especially these days.

And I'd like to be named Secretary of Defense. Unfortunately (for me, at least) neither is going to happen.

Obviously, once in power the Obama administration, like any administration, will prioritize even if they pay rhetorical lip service to American omnipotence. But no one should be surprised that an administration staffed with former Clinton officials would wax hubristic.

Photo via seiu international under a Creative Commons license.