海角大神

It was no surprise when the United States, responding to recent repression of Venezuelans protesting food shortages and antidemocratic measures, condemned President Nicolas Maduro鈥檚 鈥渄isregard for the fundamental rights of his own people.鈥�

What made the unvarnished criticism noteworthy was that it came not from the nation鈥檚 chief diplomat, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, nor from a State Department statement, but from the US ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley.

Last month, Ms. Haley was captured by global television cameras packing boxes of staples for Syrian refugees during a visit to an aid distribution center in Turkey 鈥� clad in her khaki pants and aid worker鈥檚 vest. The intrigue was not so much that an American diplomat was rolling up her sleeves to call attention to the world鈥檚 worst humanitarian crisis. Rather, it was that here was a representative of the new president promoting international humanitarian action and pledging US support for refugees and human rights at the same time her boss is seen widely to be downplaying those traditional American foreign-policy values and goals.

Four months into a Trump presidency typified by transactional diplomacy, retreat from American-led multilateralism, and Mr. Tillerson鈥檚 brand of interests-first, values-later international relations, Haley is the foreign-policy outlier.

Already the administration鈥檚 lone voice demanding global respect for human rights and democratic aspirations, the former South Carolina governor and daughter of Indian immigrants took her soapbox from New York to Geneva Tuesday. There, she addressed the UN鈥檚 Human Rights Council 鈥� underscoring the importance she assigns to the issue. (Her staff made a point of trumpeting that Haley would be the first US ambassador to the UN to speak to the council.)

Indeed Haley is so outspoken and public with her message 鈥� especially compared with the private and rhetorically parsimonious Tillerson 鈥� the world might be excused for thinking she is the new administration鈥檚 chief diplomat.

While Haley鈥檚 high international profile offers President Trump some advantages, foreign policy experts say, it can also be confusing both to Americans and to the world.

鈥淭he juxtaposition of her outspokenness and Rex Tillerson鈥檚 reticence may have some value for the president, but it becomes particularly problematic in terms of the administration鈥檚 messaging to the world,鈥� says Stewart Patrick, a former policy planning staff member in the George W. Bush State Department who now focuses on US policy and international organizations at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington.

鈥淚t can be jarring to people here at home, not least to Congress, but it鈥檚 also confusing to allies and problematic in dealing with adversaries abroad,鈥� he adds. 鈥淯ltimately that weakens the US position in the world.鈥�

He cites the administration鈥檚 mixed messaging 鈥� generally with Haley as the outlier 鈥� on issues ranging from Russia and Syria鈥檚 Bashar al-Assad to the place of values in US foreign policy. Tillerson has said Mr. al-Assad might stay; Haley says he must go. Tillerson prizes repairing relations with Russia; Haley blasts Moscow鈥檚 obstructionist work on Syria and other issues at the UN.

And Haley places human rights and values at the core of foreign policy. Tillerson, meanwhile, is probably best known so far for his interests-first speech in April in which he warned that conditioning international relations on values 鈥渃reates obstacles to our ability to advance on our national security interests and our economic interests.鈥�

In contrast, Haley told the Human Rights Council, 鈥淩espect for human rights is deeply intertwined with peace and security,鈥� while 鈥渉uman rights violations and abuses often serve as triggers for instability and conflict.鈥� Moreover, she said her presence at the council was meant to 鈥渦nderscore our strong conviction to the protection and promotion of human rights.鈥�

Haley went on to host a council session on Venezuela鈥檚 human right abuses, and later gave a speech at the Graduate Institute Geneva on needed reforms and strengthening of the Human Rights Council.聽聽

Washington vs. New York

The 鈥渢ension鈥� on display is not new to US foreign policy, Dr. Patrick says. But it is much more pronounced in the Trump administration, he adds, 鈥渨ith Nikki Haley at least a little bit out of sync with the more nationalist coterie of the president鈥� 鈥� a group he says has聽 鈥渁bandoned the traditional position of stature the White House has given to human rights and promoting American values.鈥�

Indeed some experts say that while there is nothing new in the tension between 鈥淲ashington and New York鈥� 鈥� meaning between the State Department and the US permanent representative to the UN 鈥� what is new is the switch in terms of which of the two is the iconoclast, and which represents more traditional US foreign policy.

鈥淏eing named the permanent representative in New York is an invitation to quasi independence, but typically it鈥檚 been the permanent representative who is the maverick pushing the limits,鈥� says Michael Doyle, an international relations expert at Columbia University in New York. 鈥淭he irony here is that it鈥檚 the permanent representative who is in the mainstream of traditional US foreign policy,鈥� he adds, 鈥渁nd the administration in Washington that is the 鈥�ex-迟谤别尘别鈥�.鈥�

Dr. Doyle, who has decades of experience working with the UN and observing US ambassadors there, cites a list of Washington鈥檚 representatives who hewed their own path and often maintained contentious relations with the White House 鈥� from Jeanne Kirkpatrick under President Reagan to John Bolton under President George W. Bush.

鈥淚t got to the point with John Bolton that [Secretary of State] Condoleezza Rice had to insist that he restrict his comments to strictly UN matters and give up the commentary on broader US foreign policy,鈥� Doyle says.

Outliers as assets

But outliers are sometimes useful, and both Doyle and Patrick see ways in which Haley is an asset to Trump 鈥� first and foremost, politically.

鈥淭rump鈥檚 foreign policy doesn鈥檛 sit well with many more traditional Republicans, and so appointing [Haley] was essentially throwing a bone or a chip to the mainstream of the Republican Party,鈥� Doyle says.

鈥淚 think there鈥檚 a recognition she can be useful to the president to reassure and attract some of the values promoters and the more neoconservative elements鈥� in Washington, Patrick says.

Indeed Haley at times sounds like she鈥檚 channeling Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, whom she supported in the Republican primaries. And last month Democratic Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey, a staunch advocate of prioritizing human rights in foreign policy, lauded Haley for her 鈥渕oral clarity鈥� 鈥� a quality he said was necessary to 鈥渄rive us in the right direction.鈥�

On another level, having Haley represent the US might help Trump smooth relations with allies who have been thrown for a loop by the new administration鈥檚 apparent aversion to multilateral engagement.

鈥淗aley鈥檚 rhetoric is more traditionally American, and thus is much more acceptable to the community of democratic nations,鈥� Doyle says, 鈥渁nd something of a reassurance that not all of America has gone off the deep end.鈥�

鈥楧oes everybody like Nikki?鈥�

Still, there have been signs of White House irritation with Haley鈥檚 outspokenness and independence. In April, the State Department drafted a memo to Haley鈥檚 aides directing them to clear her comments with Washington first, according to The New York Times. The memo also advised that public statements should be constructed with 鈥渂uilding blocks鈥� provided by Washington, especially on 鈥渉igh-profile鈥� issues like Syria and North Korea.

Then there was the joke that Trump cracked over lunch with UN Security Council diplomats, whom Haley had invited to the White House.

鈥淣ow, does everybody like Nikki?鈥� Trump asked, adding, 鈥淏ecause if you don鈥檛, otherwise, she can easily be replaced.鈥� After a few nervous laughs, the president added, 鈥淲e won鈥檛 do that, she鈥檚 doing a fantastic job.鈥�

So for now Haley continues on her path, extolling the place of human rights in US foreign policy, and reassuring refugees that the US has not forgotten them. And that outlier position may retain its potency for some time to come, some say, at least until the fate of Trump鈥檚 proposed deep cuts to the UN and to humanitarian assistance provide some fresh clarity.

鈥淗er rhetoric will continue to provide reassurances about the US for a while,鈥� Doyle says, 鈥渂ut ultimately it鈥檚 the budget decisions that will determine if there鈥檚 really anything behind the rhetoric. And of course while there may be some independence with the rhetoric,鈥� he adds, 鈥渢he budget decisions are made in the president鈥檚 shop.鈥�