Published on
Associated Press

Clinton's Mideast Defense Claims Set Off Tremors

Matthew Lee

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speaks during a news conference at the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Regional Forum in Phuket July 22, 2009. Clinton sketched out on Wednesday how the United States might cope with a nuclear Iran - by arming its allies in the Gulf and extending a "defence umbrella" over the region. (REUTERS/Sukree Sukplang) (THAILAND POLITICS)

WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton set off
tremors in the Middle East this week when she said a nuclear Iran could
be contained by a U.S. "defense umbrella" — an offhand remark that
appears to have emerged from obscure Washington policy debates and her
own presidential campaign rhetoric.

Clinton's comments raised
eyebrows because they seemed to go beyond the Obama administration's
current thinking on Iran, which has been strictly focused on preventing
the country from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Since making the
remark on a television chat show in Thailand, Clinton has backpedaled,
saying she was only restating existing policy and not referring to any
sort of formal guarantees of protection under an American "nuclear

And when Israeli officials raised alarms that she
seemed to suggest the U.S. was resigned to a nuclear-armed Iran,
Clinton and senior State Department officials hastily insisted such a
prospect was still unacceptable and that no policy had changed.

her comments sounded uncannily like the harder-edged "nuclear umbrella"
approach toward Iran that Clinton and several other top advisers to
President Barack Obama had pushed before they joined his administration.

both Arab allies and Israel under a protective U.S. "nuclear umbrella"
is an idea that has been batted around Washington since fears of Iran's
ambitions first percolated in the late 1990s.

Clinton herself raised the notion of such a policy during her unsuccessful presidential campaign last year.

should be looking to create an umbrella of deterrence that goes much
further than just Israel," she said in an April 2008 debate with Obama.
"Of course, I would make it clear to the Iranians that an attack on
Israel would incur massive retaliation from the United States. But I
would do the same with other countries in the region."

During that debate, Obama affirmed support for Israel's security but did not suggest protecting Arab states.

policy experts say Clinton's umbrella reference was simple
carelessness. Others wonder if it is indicative of an administration
that has yet to show discipline in foreign policy thought and action.

is something that a secretary of state, in an academic or
off-the-record setting, might muse about," said Aaron David Miller, a
former Mideast peace negotiator now with the Woodrow Wilson Center
International Center for Scholars.

"But saying it on the road and
on-the-record is something else," he said. "It reflects to a certain
degree a problem. It reflects a certain confusion in the
administration's approach and the absence still of a coherent and
cohesive strategy."

During her trip last week, Clinton mentioned a "defense umbrella" during an interview on Thai television Wednesday.

want Iran to calculate," she said, "what I think is a fair assessment:
that if the United States extends a defense umbrella over the region,
if we do even more to develop the military capacity of those (allies)
in the Gulf, it is unlikely that Iran will be any stronger or safer
because they won't be able to intimidate and dominate as they
apparently believe they can once they have a nuclear weapon," she said.

A day later, she insisted to another interviewer that the "defense umbrella" was "nothing specific."

is a sort of general term that is used to describe our commitment to
making sure that Iran doesn't get a nuclear weapon," she said.

White House declined to comment on what options may now be under
consideration for dealing with Iran. But it refused to rule out any

"As the president has said many times, we are using all
elements of American power, including diplomacy, to ensure Iran does
not develop nuclear weapons," said spokesman Tommy Vietor.

Clinton's insistence that her phrasing was general, the concept of an
American "nuclear umbrella" protecting Mideast nations from Iran has
wafted through Washington think tanks for several years.

concept is based on the Cold War era of deterrence and aims to stop a
nuclear-armed country from threatening an unarmed neighbor.

Ross, who worked for Clinton at the State Department and now heads
Mideast policy at the National Security Council, and Robert Einhorn,
now a special adviser for nonproliferation and arms control at State —
both lent their names to consideration of the concept.

advisers were formerly affiliated with the Washington Institute on Near
East Policy, which in March of this year published a report that
recommended studying the idea closely. The study noted that Ross and
Einhorn, who had already resigned to work with Obama, had endorsed
drafts of the report.

The report noted there were some pitfalls
with the idea. For one, Iran may not feel deterred by such a move, it
said. For another, Israel would object on several grounds, including
the possibility that it would limit its own deterrent capability.

testifying before Congress in April 2008, also warned that "our
security assurances may not be particularly relevant to the threats
that most worry Middle Eastern regimes."

The concept of a
"nuclear umbrella" to deter Iran first crystalized around 2004,
according to experts. Patrick Clawson, Ross' former colleague at the
Washington institute, wrote about it in 2004, saying that "extending an
explicit nuclear umbrella to those threatened by Iran" should be

But there is a sharp line, Miller said, between
weighing policy notions in private and putting them out in public
before they have been carefully explored and vetted.

"You don't
discuss something like this in the open, particularly when you haven't
decided on policy," Miller said, "because everything you say is going
to be put under a microscope and dissected for clues about how we're
going to act."

This is the world we live in. This is the world we cover.

Because of people like you, another world is possible. There are many battles to be won, but we will battle them together—all of us. Common Dreams is not your normal news site. We don't survive on clicks. We don't want advertising dollars. We want the world to be a better place. But we can't do it alone. It doesn't work that way. We need you. If you can help today—because every gift of every size matters—please do. Without Your Support We Simply Won't Exist.

Share This Article

More in: