From Yahoo Finance's Sam Ro (of all places), Trump’s pick for Secretary of State has substantial experience in international relations due to his responsibilities as overseer of Exxon’s global empire.
Exxon has a massive global footprint, and its relationships with foreign governments are much more complicated than those of a retailer looking to open a store. Exxon goes in to produce and distribute oil and oil products.
It’s not crazy to compare Exxon to a small country and say that Tillerson is its “secretary of state.”
Below is a map showing where the company is currently pumping oil and gas.
This next map shows where the company has been exploring for oil and gas. As you can see, many of these locations include geopolitical hotspots.
BUT does Putin like Tillerson?
The last line of his bio on Exxon’s website reads: “In 2013, he was awarded the Order of Friendship by Vladimir Putin, president of the Russian Federation.”
What is the potential for mutual backscratching?
Exxon’s annual report includes a huge section of risk factors titled “Government and Political Factors.” From that section: “ExxonMobil is subject to laws and sanctions imposed by the U.S. or by other jurisdictions where we do business that may prohibit ExxonMobil or certain of its affiliates from doing business in certain countries, or restricting the kind of business that may be conducted. Such restrictions may provide a competitive advantage to competitors who may not be subject to comparable restrictions.”
Sam Ro’s conclusion:
Imagine being able to influence laws and sanctions from inside.
And so the conflicts of interest are unprecedented in their scale though they’re unlikely to get in the way of his confirmation with a Republican-controlled Senate.
I recently dealt with a Trump supporter who insisted that under Obama there are more poor people. This is true, but facts standing alone without context it are also meaningless. Facts become meaningful when used to compare and contrast. Turns out that while absolute numbers have grown, so has the population. The poverty rate has been decreasing during the Obama administration. It is a little higher than when Bush left office, but if we want to blame associate the poverty rate with a president, we cannot forget that nasty little fact that the poverty rate rocketed under Bush in the aftermath of the financial crisis.
Therefore, I would like the community to help think about adding more context to the discussion of cabinet picks. I would like to explore a few questions while setting aside for a moment the fact it’s a Trump pick and the allegation of Russian influence on the election results. What if Tillerson was a Hillary pick? How much of our criticism is partisan sniping, and how much is genuine critique?
What exactly is the “swamp”? Is it even possible to fill an administration with non-swamp creatures who also have excellent qualifications. In other words, who would we consider good picks for the various cabinet positions and why? What kind of experience is “good” experience? Does business experience automatically mean irreconcilable conflicts of interest? Tillerson is due to retire soon. If a cabinet pick leaves his business position, does he automatically eliminate the conflict of interest problem?