Abroad Clinton had tried in vain to steer clear
of using US power aggressively. But after diplo-
macy had failed he did intervene in Kosovo in
March 1999 to put an end to Milosˇevic ́’s mur-
derous campaign against the ethnic Albanian
people; he did so in a way that would endanger
the least American lives, from the air. He resisted
the call by Britain’s prime minister Tony Blair to
oust the Serbians by an offensive on the ground
using such of the NATO allies prepared to par-
ticipate. This prolonged the conflict and caused
even greater suffering. It was left to the Serbs in
the following year to oust Milosˇevic ́. The same
reluctance to act marked his policy towards Iraq
even after the UN weapons inspectors were
thrown out. Saddam Hussein defied the UN who
countered with economic sanctions. Britain and
the US limited their intervention by defining pro-
tective no-fly zones in the south and north of Iraq
and from time to time punishing the military by
missile attacks on their bases. No US military per-
sonnel would be put at serious risk.
On reducing the nuclear missile threat,
Clinton made little headway. The technology for
an effective missile defence system, successor to
Star Wars, simply proved inadequate and hugely
costly if attempted. US intervention in Haiti in
1994 turned sour. The military were turned out
but Bertrand Aristide installed as the elected pres-
ident did not halt violence or the country falling
into deeper poverty. In Cuba, Castro continued
to symbolise the patriot standing up against the
bullying US. Clinton did not lift the trade
embargo applied practically by the US alone,
though contacts increased and tensions lessened.
US policies have done nothing to increase its
influence. Clinton deserves credit for his attempts,
down to his final days in the White House, to
move forward the Palestinians and Israelis in a
peace process. Had he succeeded that alone
would have ensured his place in history. It was
not due to lack of effort on his part that he failed
when at one time a peace deal seemed within
grasp at the Camp David negotiation between
Arafat and Barak in September 2000. Clinton left
the White House, a well-liked president at home
and respected for his contributions to peace-
making abroad. His years in the White House are
remembered for continuous prosperity and no
fatal adventures abroad, in the end a respectable
record of achievement.Vice-President Gore should have been able to
capitalise on the successful Clinton White House
years. The scandals and sleaze of the Clinton years
were not the uppermost election issue Gore had
to fear. Gore had none of Clinton’s easy charm
and fought an uninspiring election campaign.
George W. Bush, son of former president George
Bush, also started with a handicap, a notorious
inability to speak English without making errors.
As a popular two-time governor of Texas, he had
earned a reputation for toughness on crime. His
ideology was ‘compassionate conservatism’.
During his election campaign he avoided the
mistake his father had made of making promises
it turned out he could not keep. His promise to
cut taxes was popular, his undertaking to put ‘a
touch of iron’ in foreign relations not sufficiently
specific to be alarming; on the hotly contested
question of abortion, he was non-commital.
Gore’s proposed tax cuts were targeted more to
the less well-off and more cautious than those
proposed by Bush. Gore’s health plan reforms
relied less on private insurance and added a benefit
for prescriptions; Bush relied more on private pro-
vision, Gore on state and federal assistance. The
differences were not huge, the electorate equally
divided between the two candidates.
After the votes had been cast on 15 November
2000, the outcome was in doubt and depended
on a few hundred cast in Florida. In Palm Beach
County the arrangement of candidates on the
ballot paper had confused some voters; in the
wealthiest country in the world, punch card tech-
nology of voting machines functioned imper-
fectly; manual recounts, the famous ‘chard’ pieces
of paper hanging from holes had to be examined
to see whether the hole had been effectively
pierced to enable the machine to count the vote.
State law and local officials decided the outcome.
Gore did not concede; the legal wrangles were
finally adjudicated by the Supreme Court five
weeks after election day. Although Gore had won
more votes nationally, he had lost the votes cast
by the Electoral College based on who had come