The Bill Clinton Administration Research Paper

The presidency of Bill Clinton was characterized by highly controversial assessment and there are both admirers and severe critics of the policy held by the president administration since 1993 to 2001. Such a contrast in assessments obviously results from the work of all members of the administration but often it is personally Bill Clinton who is responsible for both successes and failures of American policy during his presidency.

In fact it is an obvious mistake because Bill Clinton physically could not effectively work without assistance of his team, his administration. On the other hand, the role of the president’s personality should not underestimated as well because Bill Clinton can be also characterized as a person possessing certain charisma, which attracts people and which has made him popular and helped him to overcome many problems, including impeachment. It is also necessary to remember that it was the president who formed the administration consequently it is Bill Clinton mainly who is responsible for the achievements and failures of his administration policy but still his administration consisted of skilful professional and many of them could act as independent politicians, as some of them have actually did after the end of Bill Clinton presidency term.

In the same time the period of Bill Clinton presidency is characterized by significant historical events and the role of the US and consequently its leader, including the president administration, was very important. This is why it is necessary to analyse the policy of Bill Clinton administration in order to understand what was the general effect of its work and what were the main points of its domestic, international policy. And, finally, in the context of the current situation in the US and in the whole world, the question of national security in the period of the Clinton administration work should be discussed.

Domestic policy

Speaking about the domestic policy of the Bill Clinton administration it is necessary to point out that the presidency was marked by quite significant economic progress and the period may be considered as quite successful from the economic point of view. In fact the work of the democratic president administration, or to put it more precisely, its results and economic development in this period are quite contrasting to the results of republican administrations for both George Bush Senior and Junior presidency is marked by if not economic crisis than a kind of economic slow down in the country development.

Obviously, judging from such perspective the work of Bill Clinton had quite a positive impact on the development of the country and its economy but in actuality it is a bit erroneous to judge by results only since it is also necessary to take into consideration some other objective factors, which influenced the situation in the country. For instance, the problem of terrorism on the territory of the US has not been so threatening to the national security during the presidency of Bill Clinton compared to the current situation.

Also it is necessary to develop natural economic dynamics that is characterised by growth followed by certain stagnation. In such a way it is possible to speak about the presidency of Clinton that coincided with the stage of economic growth but in the same time it is still necessary to admit that the president administration has made a significant contribution into the development of the country.

So, it is necessary to dwell upon the key points in the domestic policy of the Bill Clinton administration work in order to better realize its achievements and failures.

First of all it should be pointed out that the Bill Clinton administration tend to stabilize American economy and provide its sustainable development. It is noteworthy that the basic goals of the president administration have been eventually achieved since the US economy was characterized by continuous expansion, the rate of unemployment decreased significantly, and the wealth of Americans grew through a massive rise in the stock market. Such trends permitted some specialists to speak about economic boom in the US, which, unfortunately “ended shortly after his term ended, possibly indicative of a stock market bubble” (Klein 2003:157). Despite the fact that the reasons for such economic progress were debated and the achievements of the president administration were severely criticized still it was impossible to deny figures indicating at positive development of American economy. For instance, on summarizing the work of the Bill Clinton administration it should be underlined that 18 million of new jobs were created resulting in the lowest unemployment rate in 30 years; homeownership increased from 64.0% to 67.5%; incomes increased on all levels; largest budget deficit in American history ‘inherited’ from the Bush administration was converted into the largest surplus over 200 billion dollars that was accompanied with the lowest government spending as a percentage of GDP since 1974; and finally the rate of family stock ownership had been higher than ever before.

Nonetheless, these data did not impress the Bill Clinton administration’s critics. But in spite of the criticism, the supporters of the Clinton administration policy indicate at “1993 tax increase as the reason that eventually led to the reduction in the annual budget deficits six years later” (Klein 2003:310) though the Joint Economic Study Committee, Conducted by the House of Representatives, explicitly stated that the data did not warrant such an assumption.

In the same time it is impossible to deny positive effect of the reduction of the budget deficit, which “stimulated consumption and consumer spending” (Bovard 2000:120) that led to the strengthening of dollar, which in its turn stimulated growth of foreign investments in American economy.

On the other hand, the policy of increasing taxes was not a permanent strategy of the Bill Clinton administration since in 1997 it agreed with Republicans on a deal that “combined tax cuts and reductions in spending to produce the first balanced federal budget in three decades” (Currie 2005:193) but it may have an opposite effect that increase of taxes had, namely in a way it may be considered as one of the reason for the budget deficits that were and still are observed in the years to follow.

However the economy was not the only domain where the Bill Clinton administration aimed to achieve possibly better results. In fact the economy was probably not of the primary concern for the president administration since the first legislative acts worked out by its members basically concerned social and healthcare sphere. By the way it is noteworthy to remind that the first act signed by Bill Clinton as the president of the US was “executive order 12834, which placed substantial restrictions upon the ability of his senior political appointees to lobby their colleagues after they leave office” (Bovard 2000:219). Obviously such an act indicated at the president’s will to create really effective administration which policy could be clear for the public and deprived any personal interests in taking decision while the national interests were supposed to totally dominate.

Returning to social and healthcare legislative acts developed by the president administration, it should be said that one of the first and probably one of the most perspective acts developed by the new president administration was the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 , which required “large employers to allow their employees to take unpaid leave because of pregnancy or serious medical condition” (Walsh 2003:91).

This was a very popular action from the part of the president administration indicating that the promises that have been given during the campaign would be fulfilled but in actuality the administration of Bill Clinton turned to be quite selective in fulfilment of such promises. For instance, the promise relating to “the acceptance of the openly homosexual members of the military garnered criticism” (Bovard 2000:264).

Finally even the first success in health care turned to be spoiled by the following failure to completely reform the health care system. But still the administration and the president remained quite popular.

International policy

As for the international policy, the Bill Clinton administration was not so successful as it was in domestic affairs but still there were serious successes as well as failures. In general the international policy of the president administration produced an ambiguous impression since it was often criticized for its double standards which became obvious when the US take strict measures, for instance introduced embargos etc, against some countries and ignored the violation of human rights in others.

It would be logical to start with the economic sphere in order to compare the administration’s achievements to those in domestic policy. In fact the international policy of the Bill Clinton administration may be treated as quite peaceful and economically oriented since the military expenditures were reduced and military wing has not played a significant role anymore in the president administration.

In accordance to the general line of foreign policy, the administration developed international trade on all levels as a result the NAFTA and similar programs were amply supported. Despite the fact that it was George Bush who initiated the negotiations “it was passed by the United States Congress in 1993, after Clinton and vice president Gore lobbied heavily for it” (Currie 2005:199). Moreover, “the Clinton administration used the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights thirteen times and prevailed in the WTO thirteen times” (Currie 2005:200). It means that the president administration aim at the active part of the US in international trade to promote and protect American companies and products in international markets.

Furthermore, the Clinton administration was quite active in international affairs and not surprisingly that in some cases the president was called a peacekeeper since he due to the assistance of his administration attempted to establish peace in the regions where conflicts have lasted for decades, especially in the UK and Israel . As a result among the greatest accomplishments of the Clinton administration are considered to be mediating peace talks Israel and the PLO resulting in Oslo Accords (1993). Unfortunately this achievement was followed by the “collapse of the 2000 Camp David Summit and the Commencement of the al-Aqsa Intifada, resulted in the Oslo Accords being widely discredited within Israel and various Palestinian factions by 2004″ (Klein 2003:391).

In the same time, the president administration and president himself admitted the military intervention in Kosovo, Sudan, Somalia, Bosnia and Afghanistan even despite the negative attitude of the team to military branch. By the way these attacks were interpreted by many as the violation of the international law and were severely criticized both within the country and abroad. These were the cases when the US decided to use military force. So, in 1994, American troops were sent to Haiti to restore Jean Bertrand Aristide as the president, ending a period of intense violence. Also the troops were sent to former Yugoslavia to stop ethnic violence.

On the other hand despite such a combination of military and peaceful measures aiming at preserving the peace and stability in the world along with promotion of human rights all over the world, the Clinton administration practically ignored burning cases of the violation of human rights and even genocide. For instance, the administration and the president did not attempt to intervene in the conflict in Rwanda where a real genocide occurred.

In fact it was not the only fact that caused severe criticism of the Clinton administration and its international policy. The nuclear policy led by the president administration was also criticised. In 1994, Clinton and his administration negotiated and signed the Nuclear Accords with North Korea. The primary concern was that “North Korea was developing nuclear weapon technology under the guise of the nuclear power plant” (Johnson 2003:211). On the accords were signed North Korea abandoned its ambitions to acquire nuclear weapons but in mid 1990s it was reported that North Korea violated these Accords and consequently it was hardly possible to speak about the positive effects of the American-North Korean negotiations and agreements.

All these fact emphasize the ambiguous nature of the Clinton administration international policy.

National security

However, all the criticism referring to both domestic and international policy of the Clinton administration seems to be quite insignificant compared to allegations in the weakening of national security system and putting under a great threat the security of the country, which became particularly sounding after the end of the presidential term of Bill Clinton.

As it has already mentioned the president formed his administration practically ignoring military wing and basically civilians occupied the key position in his administration. But what was more important the president administration limited the financing of military forces and reduced their number. For instance, “the army was cut from 18 divisions to 12. The Navy was reduced from 546 ships to 380. Air Forces flight squadrons were cut from 76 to 50″ (Walsh 2003:107). Naturally such cuts of quantity was accompanied with lesser financing of the military forces that was considered by specialists as the threat to national security.

Furthermore, it is during the Clinton presidency and the work of his administration that the notorious Al-Qaeda began to emerge as the major terrorist threat. In 1998, its groups bombed American embassies in Tanzania and Kenia. In response, the Clinton administration decided to cruise missile strikes on terrorist camps in Kandahar, Afghanistan and a suspected chemical weapons facilities in Khartoum, Sudan.

Moreover, Clinton gave orders, authorizing arrest or, if necessary, assassination of the leader of Al-Qaeda, Osama bin Laden. Unfortunately, Americans did not succeed in it and the critics of the president administration remind the ignoring the questions of national security and lack of attention to military forces and advisors working in the Clinton administration.

At the end of the Clinton’s term the US suffered from new terror attacks giving additional reason for critics of the president administration and its policy. In this case, in late 2000 terrorists bombed the USS Cole. This time the Clinton and his administration has nothing to do but admit that Al Qaeda has become the major terrorist threat to the US national security that was absolutely and tragically proved the September 11, 2001. In such a way despite all the progress and socio-economic achievements of the Clinton administration its followers got the number of problems among which the threat to national security was more than real.

Conclusion

Thus, taking into consideration all above mentioned it is possible to conclude that the eight-year epoch of Clinton presidency and the work of his administration is characterized by certain degree of ambiguous in the questions of domestic policy and national security. The latter partially resulted from the international policy of the president administration and its mistakes leading to the growing of power of terrorist organization like Al-Qaeda threatening to the national security of the US and other countries of the world. Nonetheless, ordinary citizens would probably remember the improvement of the situation in American economy and social sphere after Clinton’s win on elections, decreasing rates of unemployment but all the positive feelings would be rather vague compared to recent terror attacks in the context of permanent allegations of the Clinton administration in lack of concern about national security.

Bibliography:

• Bovard, James (2000) Feeling Your Pain: The Explosion and Abuse of Government Power in the Clinton-Gore Years New York: St. Martin’s Press
• Currie, Duncan (2005). The Clinton Paradox New York: New Publishers
• Johnson, Ben (2003). Appeasing North Korea: The Clinton Legacy LA: Routledge
• Klein, Joe (2003) The Natural: The Misunderstood Presidency of Bill Clinton. New York: Broadway
• Miniter, Richard (2002). Losing Bin Laden: How Bill Clinton’s Failures Unleashed Global Terror. LA: Routledge
• Morris, Roger (1996). Partners in Power: The Clintons & Their America. LA:Henry Holt
• Ruddy Christopher and Carl Limbacher Jr., (Eds.) (2003). Catastrophe: Clinton’s Role In America’s Worst Disaster. New York: McGraw Hill
• Walsh, Mary. “Dereliction of Duty,” FrontPageMagazine.com on April 2, 2003