elect Barack Obama, inspired by his hero Abraham Lincoln's idea of creating a “team of rivals” in his Cabinet, may be gambling by choosing his ex-adversary Hillary Clinton as secretary of state. Obama admires the New York senator's work ethic, his aides have said. He also believes the former first lady's star power would boost his efforts to improve America's global standing. Beyond that, Obama sees value in Lincoln's concept of bringing together strong personalities to allow for rigorous debate. He hopes that will lead to sound decision-making - a strategy described in “Team of Rivals,” a book about Lincoln by historian Doris Kearns Goodwin. But Obama may be courting trouble in tapping the woman he narrowly defeated in the race for the Democratic White House nomination, some analysts say. They note that Clinton maintains her own power base within the party and may not have fully put to rest her own presidential ambitions. “She is someone who nearly became president,” said Reginald Dale, a scholar at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “She is a major political leader in her own right and probably feels she still ought to be president. She would be pretty forward in advancing her policies.” Model relationships Many experts cite the close relationship between former secretary of state James Baker and President George H.W. Bush as the model for a well-functioning foreign policy team. They note that President George W. Bush had a much chillier relationship with his first secretary of state, Colin Powell. That undercut Powell's clout abroad and tilted the balance of power in the White House toward Bush's hawkish Vice President Dick Cheney. “When foreign leaders spoke with Baker, they knew that they were speaking to President Bush, and they knew that President Bush would defend Baker from domestic rivals and the machinations of foreign governments,” wrote New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman. Clinton may have ultimately backed Obama and campaigned vigorously for him, but she has never been close to Obama and that could leave questions among some foreign leaders about whether she truly speaks for him, Friedman wrote. Clinton is not the only strong personality on the national security team Obama is expected to unveil on Monday. Retired Marine Gen. James Jones, the former NATO commander, is widely expected to be named White House national security adviser. Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who has served under several Republican presidents, is likely to remain in his job. Another foreign-policy player will be Vice President-elect Joe Biden, who was chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Fluent in French with more than four decades of military experience, Jones, a former Marine commandant, is known for an engaging personality. He has not aligned himself with either the Democratic or Republican party. Gates is known as a big-picture thinker, though is lower-key than Jones. He is a former CIA director and was deputy national security adviser under the first president Bush. The picks signal a centrist bent for Obama, whose early opposition to the Iraq war galvanized his party's liberal base. Not far apart Obama, who describes his foreign policy approach as pragmatic, has said he believes national security should be nonpartisan and has often complimented the national security approach of the first President Bush, a moderate Republican. Obama and Clinton are not far apart on policy. During the primaries, Obama criticized Clinton's judgment for her Senate vote to authorize the Iraq war. But like many other Democrats who initially backed the war, she quickly became a critic and agrees with Obama on the need for a phased troop withdrawal. Clinton famously ran an advertisement depicting a 3 A.M. crisis call at the White House to argue that Obama, a first-term Illinois senator, was not ready to be commander-in-chief. Clinton tended to talk tougher, once saying she would “obliterate” Iran if it attacked Israel. She criticized as “naive” Obama's call for direct presidential-level engagement with foes like Iran and North Korea. But Clinton broadly sides with Obama in supporting a greater emphasis on engagement in US foreign policy. Judging by the campaigns each ran, they have contrasting management styles, with Clinton's operation marked by turbulence and infighting that contrasted with the discipline of the president-elect's team and his “No-Drama Obama” mantra. Their two styles might not mesh. David Rothkopf, author of “Running the World,” a book about the White House National Security Council, said Jones might be key to a successful Obama's foreign policy team. As a military leader who understands chain of command, Jones could serve as the honest broker the position demands, Rothkopf said. But ultimately, it is up to the future president to present a clear vision of the policy he wants and to assert himself when egos clash, he added. Rothkopf, who served in former President Bill Clinton's administration, challenged the view that Hillary Clinton and Obama have starkly different styles and said they could turn out to have a rapport after all. “If you look at their approach to policy, it's quite academic, very disciplined,” he said. “They are students of policy, they can both be accused of being wonks (and) they are very methodical.”
