Just hours before Kim Jong Un’s regime launched yet another intercontinental ballistic missile, the woman who brought you the Russian “reset button” had another genius idea on how to deal with North Korea: Go easy on them.
According to Bloomberg, the moment came during Clinton’s video-conferenced keynote speech at Caijing Magazine’s annual conference in Beijing on Tuesday. The former secretary of state and failed Democrat candidate for president slammed both President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping for what she called “bluster” and “personal taunts.”
“Beijing should remember that inaction is a choice as well,” Clinton said.
By “inaction,” Clinton could possibly have been referencing the policy of “strategic patience,” the Obama administration’s declared way of dealing with North Korea’s provocations. Those without amnesia might remember that this didn’t go quite so swimmingly in the recent past, and bringing it back would be the height of inanity.
Indeed, if you needed a reminder, North Korea decided to test-fire another ICBM on Wednesday, just hours after the Clinton speech.
The missile test was the first one from the North Koreans since September. It also marked new records for height and distance flown by a North Korean missile.
“It went higher, frankly, than any previous shot they’ve taken, a research and development effort on their part to continue building ballistic missiles that can threaten everywhere in the world, basically,” Defense Secretary Jim Mattis told reporters.
The president remained confident, however: “It is a situation that we will handle,” he told reporters.
Yet, inconceivably, liberal voices within the media thought that what Clinton was adumbrating was similar to what President Trump has been saying.
“What’s striking is that the complaints Clinton makes about China are very similar to the ones that Trump has made, suggesting that any U.S. administration would be focused on getting tougher with Beijing,” Siddharth Mohandas, principal with the The Asia Group and a former adviser to John Kerry during Kerry’s tenure as secretary of state, told Bloomberg.
“The difference is that Clinton would likely have invested more in regional diplomacy to achieve these goals, and that may have achieved greater regional buy-in,” he added.
What kind of regional buy-in this might have engendered is anybody’s guess, although one questions whether this would have involved China and Russia — two regional North Korean allies who, if they had decided to not buy in, would have effectively ended any diplomatic efforts. I also don’t remember Clinton talking about “fire and fury,” but alas.
Clinton also called for the resumption of six-party talks on nuclear disarmament, which have broken down in failure on a number of occasions.
Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy has alway been a disaster, going all the way from the Russian reset to Benghazi to how her State Department handled the pullout from Iraq and Afghanistan.
That’s what she was able to do when she wasn’t even in the Oval Office. For whatever your misgivings about Donald Trump may entail, just imagine what our foreign policy embroilments and appeasements would look like if Hillary and the Clinton troupe were retrenched at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
It’s a scary thought, especially given what she said just before the latest ICBM launch.
Like us on Facebook – USA Liberty News
Please like and share on Facebook and Twitter with your thoughts on Hillary’s remarks.
How do you think President Trump should handle the latest North Korean provocation? Scroll down to comment below!