Well before President Bill Clinton found time to visit the subcontinent in March 2000, the last year of his tenure in the White House, Hillary had made frequent trips to India and the region. Since then she had consciously cultivated an association with Indian Americans. Unlike Obama, Hillary offered early support to President George W. Bush’s controversial nuclear deal with India. Not surprisingly there was some disappointment in New Delhi when Hillary lost the contest for Democratic Presidential nomination. All is well that ends well? Not so fast. The talk of Hillary as America’s top diplomat has set off a storm of media criticism in the US. Most commentators agree that Hillary has all the qualifications to become great secretary of state, but raise a number of objections.

Some have drawn attention to the potential complications that could arise out of Bill Clinton’s expansive business arrangements with a variety of international sources. The Clintons, however, are apparently eager to ensure that there will be no conflict of interest, if she takes charge of American diplomacy.

Others point to a sharper conflict of interest between Hillary and Obama that could undermine the effectiveness of American diplomacy during the next four years. As a strong persona with presidential ambitions of her own, the argument goes, Hillary could accentuate the inevitable friction between the White House and the state. Unless the duo works as a team with Hillary clearly agreeing to a subordinate role, analysts say, she might not be an effective secretary of state.

... contd.