Is Albrights criticism of the Bush Admin. policy good ex-Secy of State form or not?

Just wondered. Is it normal for ex Secretaries of State to publicly criticize later administrations they are not part of, or is this considered bad form?

Forgot the news story link

Bush’s foreign policy “not good for the world”: Madeleine Albright

I wouldn’t call it normal, but I wouldn’t consider it bad form. What alligencies or obligations is she breaking? A former secretary of state is still under obligations not to reveal classified info they were once privy to, obviously, but I can’t see a general gag order applying to negative remarks about the current administration. She is still a citizen, and presumably speaking for herself. I’d hate to think former politicians are no longer allowed, by law or tradition, to speak their minds after leaving office.


Well, that and she’s currently whoring her autobiography, recently released in France. A little controversy and a mention in the news is probably good for sales.


Well the fact that she is correct is sad… but I understand the OP. Its normal in every country to criticize your own… but generally not in front of other countries. Still her “allegiance” is more to her own democratic party than Bush & Co.

If she loves the country, I HOPE she’ll speak her mind: it’s the job of every patriot, of every humanitarian, and of every internationalist to praise what is right and criticize what is not right.

I can’t imagine any way in which it would help matters for her to refrain from criticizing bad policies. That would only serve to increase the likelihood that the bad policies would stand.


If she’s violating some protocol, she certainly isn’t the first x-SOS to do so.

Cite from 2000

Cite from 1999

Cite from 2000

Perhaps if it is a matter of criticizing a balance of trade policy with Upper Volta, considerations of propriety might be relevant. In questions of collossal stupidity involving war, silence is not tact, but shirking.

All of your citations involved former officials speaking on American soil.

It’s something of a tradition for former American presidents to avoid critizing the foreign policy of a successor whilst on foreign soil.

That said, I’m unaware of the tradition carrying over to other officials. So I’m not seeing the to-do here.

Well it’s bad form only in the sense that apparently only conservative Republicans are allowed to criticize, even after the person being criticized (Clinton) has been out of office for over 3 years.:rolleyes:

Well it’s bad form only in the sense that apparently only liberal Democrats are fundamentally bad at math. :rolleyes:

here :stuck_out_tongue: