Posted By Josh Rogin Share

Being secretary of state is a grueling job; you're on the road most weeks, and often you get a lot less say in your country's foreign policy than you'd like. No wonder running the show in Foggy Bottom tends to be a four-year gig. So now that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said she can't imagine herself serving another four years after 2012, the obvious question becomes: Who might replace her?

Foreign-policy hands say the choice will depend on what kind of image President Obama wants to project, and what's going on in the world at the time.

"Obama's situation and the state of American foreign policy is extraordinarily fluid right now," said the Council on Foreign Relations' Walter Russell Mead. "His choice will depend on how he wants to engage the world: to kill them with kindness or to take a more aggressive approach."

Here is an initial short list, compiled with help from Cable readers and experts:

Early frontrunner: John Kerry

Kerry has been campaigning for the job since before Obama's election. He looked eminently diplomatic in convincing Afghan President Hamid Karzai to agree to a new election. And his steady stewardship of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee seems to have erased doubts about his ability to head an organization.  He's got international profile and his Massachusetts seat is (relatively?) safe.

Gray eminence: Richard Lugar

Lugar is well-respected on both sides of the aisle, has strong nonproliferation credentials, deep expertise on international issues, and has been a staunch defender of the State Department bureaucracy. His appointment would signal Obama's continued commitment to having a bipartisan cabinet. The question will be: As an 80-year-old man in 2012, has he got the vigor to do it?

Waiting in the wings: Jim Steinberg

Steinberg is said to be somewhat disappointed at not getting a higher posting in the first round of the Obama appointments, but he's been amazingly active as deputy secretary of state, injecting himself into almost every issue and taking on Asia as his personal policy domain. He knows the building, which would make for a smooth transition. His reported clashes within the department and throughout the interagency would be his only drawback.

Already in the cabinet: Susan Rice

Rice spends more time in Washington than most of her U.N. ambassador predecessors. With full cabinet rank, she's not shy in playing a role in foreign policy so far, and she benefits from her close personal relationship with Obama. Her appointment would signal a redoubling of the effort toward engagement and international diplomacy. But if times are tough and wars are raging, her chances might be slimmer.

A bridge too far:  Richard Holbrooke/George Mitchell

Either of these senior envoys would have seemed like a logical successor to Clinton a year ago. Both men are grand poobahs of the foreign policy establishment, but their respective efforts to solve major international problems have thus far met with limited success. If either the situations in Afghanistan or the Middle East were to vastly improve between now and 2012, however, their stock would go straight up.

Always the bridesmaid: Chuck Hagel

A media darling, Hagel's name is always floated when one of these opportunities come up. Fiercely independent and blunt, his style never seemed to match up with the academic intellectualism of Obama. What's more, he reportedly turned down high-level ambassadorships because he didn't want to travel, so it's doubtful he would be in serious consideration.

Dark horse: Gen. David Petraeus

When Petraeus's term as head of Central Command winds down, there will be nationwide speculation about his next role. If the international atmosphere is one of danger and uncertainty, Petraeus's stature could help him overcome concerns about having a military man be the face of American foreign policy. Obama has also shown a willingness to co-opt potential presidential rivals, and the general has been regularly mooted as a Republican contender in 2012 -- notwithstanding his vigorous disavowals of any political ambitions.

JOEL SAGET/AFP/Getty Images

 

PNIEBUHR

5:15 AM ET

January 30, 2010

How about Jon Huntsman, Jr.

I think that Jon Huntsman, Jr. would be a perfect pick, for both sides. It will raise the future political capital of Jon Huntsman, and will keep the immediate political threat to the democrats naturalized.

 

TWMITTLER

8:17 PM ET

January 30, 2010

Secretary of State

Unless Clinton resigns before the end of this Obama term, the next Secretary of State will be appointed by a Republican president. That would be the Republican who defeated Clinton in the general election after she deposed Obama in the primaries.

 

GRANT

2:20 PM ET

February 1, 2010

I'm not exactly sure what

I'm not exactly sure what you're saying. Honestly, I have no idea what that means. Are you referring to Palin? To McCain? Who?

 

THE ICEMAN

2:58 PM ET

February 1, 2010

Any Republican

The comment was in regard to ANY Republican candidate to 2012. Hillary still has enough class to not run against her boss, so hence the announcement. Obama will no longer be her boss so she can challenge him in 2012 and will most assuredly beat him in the primary, if the current mood prevails.

Unfortunately for Hillary, she has been carrying Bill’s baggage and now has tainted herself with the failed presidency of Obama (again if current mood prevails). She would most likely lose to ANYONE that is NOT Obama and not a Democrat.

 

ALEXCHILTON2006

8:13 PM ET

January 31, 2010

Kerry

What could it possibly matter whether Kerry's seat is safe or not? Is the idea that Obama couldn't appoint Kerry if he lost reelection? John Kerry isn't up for reelection until 2014, so how could that possibly influence his viability as Secretary of State in 2012 or 2013?

This is an awfully sloppy publication. The Obama = Carter article (in which the only link between Obama and Carter was that WRM thought their approaches to foreign policy were both a hybrid of same two ideal types - a very tenuous and silly comparison) was of similar quality, and seems to have been published for the sole purpose of allowing FP to run a provocative cover.

 

THE ICEMAN

3:08 PM ET

February 1, 2010

You missed the point...

Being from Massachusetts I can tell you that this WAS the bluest state in the nation and perhaps the most politically corrupt. But people are waking up. If Kerry moves to Sec. State the remainder of his term needs to be filled, just like Kennedy’s.

After political shenanigans the laws were changed to allow the now (possibly not for long) Democrat Governor to appoint someone to fill the seat and/or to hold a special election. We did both this time but not without some double dealing.

That power was taken away from Romney when he was Governor by a disgustingly emergency partisan vote in the House. It was restored to Patrick in the same manner.

Patrick has a slim chance of being reelected unless an independent splits the vote. We will most likely have a Republican Governor making the appointment. If there is a special election then still the same result – a Republican takes Kerry’s seat. We have hundreds of Scott Browns running for everything in Massachusetts now. The voters are angry and have become fiercely independent. Kerry’s seat is far from “safe”.

 

GRANT

2:22 PM ET

February 1, 2010

Petraeus would be an

Petraeus would be an interesting choice, but I wouldn't be too sure about his lack of political interests. As Lions for Lambs put it 'they announce their presidential campaign by denying it' (paraphrased).

 

FET

3:03 PM ET

February 1, 2010

Baggage

All these people either have too much political baggage (Clinton, Kerry, Lugar) or lack any solid diplomatic experience. I think Clinton is simply awful as the current Secretary of State.

If I had to choose from the above list, it'd be Rice or Holbrooke.

 

BLUE13326

6:27 PM ET

February 1, 2010

Fatty Arbuckle would be my

Fatty Arbuckle would be my pick. Who else could do the job with the clowns in this administration? Fatty's a movie star, a former Keystone Cop, fat, renowned for his practical jokes, and dead.

 

TILLKAN

8:27 PM ET

February 1, 2010

Only the fools who supported invading Iraq are eligible

By over and over appointing Clintonites and other neocon-lites. Obama has rejected the one thing he could have been proud of - opposing the Iraq war.

 

BOREDWELL

8:30 PM ET

February 1, 2010

The other possibility? There

The other possibility? There are red roosters pecking on the other side of the fence waiting to fly the coop to FB. Petraeus, a fence sitter, could go blue or red. He better have a chat with Colin Powell though before saying yes.

 

J BAUSTIAN

8:37 PM ET

February 1, 2010

TWMITTLER is right

The next president will choose his own secretary of state. That person will inherit a real mess too, with crises in in places we cannot even imagine right now. My hope is that Judd Gregg will be the next president, but I have no idea who he might pick to run the State Department -- it will have to be someone tough, because a purge there is long overdue.

 

John Hudson reports on national security and foreign policy from the Pentagon to Foggy Bottom, the White House to Embassy Row, for The Cable.

Enter your email address to get The Cable delivered to your inbox each night:

Delivered by FeedBurner