海角大神

President-elect Donald Trump noted Wednesday that he鈥檇 been listening to the confirmation hearing of secretary of State nominee Rex Tillerson 鈥� and he enthused about what he鈥檇 heard from his choice to lead America鈥檚 relations with the world.

But after a full day of testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, it was clear that Mr. Tillerson does not see eye-to-eye with the man who would be his boss on a number of top-of-the-agenda issues he鈥檇 be dealing with as the nation鈥檚 top diplomat.

Nuclear proliferation? Mr. Trump wants the US to build up its nuclear arsenal and has suggested Japan and South Korea should acquire their own nuclear weapons. 鈥淚 don鈥檛 agree,鈥� Tillerson said, adding that he would not advocate 鈥渕ore nuclear weapons on the planet.鈥�

TPP? Tillerson said he does not oppose the vast Asia-Pacific trade deal that Trump repeatedly has rejected during the campaign.

Crimea and Ukraine? The nominee said he would have sent arms to Ukraine to fend off Russia鈥檚 aggression, and echoed the Western perspective that Russia鈥檚 seizure of the Crimean peninsula is illegitimate. Trump doesn鈥檛 criticize Russia over Ukraine and suggests he could accept Vladimir Putin鈥檚 Crimea grab.

Climate change? Trump has called it a 鈥渉oax鈥� and vowed to pull the US from the Paris climate accords. Tillerson said he believes climate change is real, and suggested some international measures to counter it are warranted.

Those differences and others raised plenty of eyebrows among the senators Tillerson faced.

Yet while foreign policy experts say some degree of differing views between the president and the secretary of State are not unusual, some add that there鈥檚 a big difference in this case: Neither Trump the real estate mogul nor Tillerson the retired CEO of ExxonMobil has a foreign-policy track record.

That leaves senators who must vote up or down on Tillerson鈥檚 confirmation scratching their heads over just what foreign policy the US is likely to get from the Trump administration, analysts add.

鈥淭hese kinds of discrepancies happen pretty frequently, and sometimes the secretaries of State in these circumstances are shunted aside and curtailed in their power,鈥� says Norman Ornstein, a political scientist and government scholar at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington. 鈥淎nd sometimes even a secretary with deep experience in government and foreign affairs will win some and lose some 鈥� with the recognition that it鈥檚 up to the president to make the final choice.鈥�

Testing the limits

Others say that given how Trump has moved around on many key foreign policy issues, it鈥檚 not surprising that Tillerson would carve out positions that would veer off from some of the president-elect鈥檚 more unorthodox views.

鈥淭his is a unique case, Trump has said a lot of things that he鈥檚 eventually backed off from, so I don鈥檛 think we should be too surprised that his nominee [for secretary of State] would be going back toward the mainstream of American foreign policy,鈥� says Lawrence Korb, a former Pentagon official and a foreign policy analyst at the Center for American Progress in Washington.

鈥淚 think he鈥檚 going as far as he thinks he can with his views on all these issues without alienating the guy who picked him for the job,鈥� Dr. Korb says.

Those 鈥渟hunted aside鈥� in recent history include Colin Powell, Dr. Ornstein says, noting that President George W. Bush鈥檚 first secretary of State became an 鈥渙utlier鈥� over Iraq, 鈥渁nd foreign policy ended up being run more by Bush and [Vice-President Dick] Cheney after that.鈥�

Alexander Haig, President Reagan鈥檚 first secretary of State, clashed with everyone on the Reagan foreign-policy team 鈥� including the president 鈥� and was out in less than two years. 鈥淎l Haig thought the president had delegated all foreign policy to him, and he proceeded accordingly,鈥� Ornstein says. 鈥淚t did not end well.鈥�

Korb cites the case of Cyrus Vance, President Carter鈥檚 secretary of State, who resigned after the failed attempt to use the military to rescue the Iran hostages. 鈥淗e was opposed to that, he thought negotiations were getting somewhere, and so he did the honorable thing and resigned,鈥� he says.

Revisiting 'uncharted territory'

Things worked out differently for George Shultz, Mr. Reagan鈥檚 second secretary of state, Korb says. Anxious to see more progress on arms control, Secretary Shultz threatened to resign 鈥� and Reagan moved on arms-reduction accords, not wanting to lose Shultz and have to name another secretary of State.

More recently, both John Kerry and Hillary Clinton fit in the category of some victories and some defeats, most diplomatic analysts agree. Secretary Clinton notably pressed for a more robust Syria policy, but when she failed she closed the daylight between her and the president.

What makes the current situation so different is that neither the president-elect nor his choice for secretary of State has foreign-policy experience, which makes it harder to divine whose views would likely carry the day.

鈥淭he term we can use here is the same one that applies to so much about this presidency, and that鈥檚聽 鈥榰ncharted territory,鈥欌�� says Ornstein. 鈥淯nless you count deals for building hotels and golf courses overseas and deals with foreign governments for oil drilling, this is a president and a secretary of State with zero experience in foreign policy.鈥�

Even if Trump ends up being a president who leaves much about foreign policy to his top advisers, Tillerson may find that his views matter relatively little.

鈥淭rump seems to have pretty strong positions on trade and Russia, but other than that it could be that he鈥檒l simply opt out of other foreign policy areas,鈥� Ornstein says. 鈥淏ut even then, Tillerson could find he has little influence鈥� in three-way policy debates with the national security adviser 鈥� with an office just down the hall from the president 鈥� and the secretary of Defense, he adds.

Moderation on Iran?

Still, some analysts are hearing in the Senate testimony of Trump鈥檚 foreign policy nominees 鈥� Tillerson and the Defense secretary nominee, retired Gen. James Mattis 鈥� the makings of a team that pulls Trump back from the extremes. General Mattis聽appeared before the Armed Services Committee Thursday. 聽聽

One example: the Iran nuclear deal, Korb says.

鈥淔rom what I heard from both of them in their testimony, I don鈥檛 think we鈥檙e gong to see any tearing up of the Iran deal,鈥� Korb says. 鈥淚 think if Trump really wants to go off the reservation on some things 鈥� and I鈥檇 include Iran there 鈥� I鈥檇 expect these guys to say, 鈥楲ook boss, we just can鈥檛 do it.鈥� 鈥�

Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute is less sure 鈥� and in particular he鈥檚 convinced from what he heard from Tillerson on Russia that Trump and Tillerson see eye-to-eye on scuttling Russia sanctions as soon as possible.

鈥淲hen Tillerson said sanctions would remain in place until we鈥檝e conducted a full review, that told me one thing 鈥� that very shortly after Jan. 20 sanctions will be removed,鈥� he says.

鈥淭hat will allow ExxonMobil to go ahead with its multibillion-dollar projects in Russia, and Trump to be thrilled at the wonderful things Putin says about him,鈥� Ornstein says. 鈥淏ut I think we all need to realize that a lot of headaches are going to come from that.鈥�