During her tenure as First Lady, Hillary Clinton traveled the world. This means, of course, that she met and befriended scads of international chums. And now those chums may complicate the potential secretary of state’s diplomatic future.

First, there’s the matter of India, where Clinton and her husband have traveled extensively, a fact that has some worried she won’t prove effective in ironing out the increasingly fraught relationship between India and their neighbor, Pakistan. One DC-stationed foreign diplomat remarked, "There are concerns that she is seen as pro-India, she and her husband both. The Pakistanis definitely see them as closer and friendlier to India." Walter Andersen, who is the associate director of the South Asia Studies Program at Johns Hopkins University’s School for Advanced International Studies, says any perceived bias is based soley on "inaccuracies," and insists "most people think she is an objective observer with a good understanding of South Asia." Indian American Leadership Initiative founder Varun Nikore echoed Andersen’s take, saying, "You cannot expect that any nominee for secretary of state would have a special relationship going into this job."

There’s also worry in the Middle East that Clinton’s friendly ties with Israel will make her ineffective in talks with Palestine and Syria. Saudi Arabia’s reportedly a bit worried about how their neighbors will react to Clinton, but have celebrated her tough take on Iran. Saudi political analyst Khaled al-Dakhil had this to say about Clinton’s involvement: "Her hawkishness on Iran would be welcome and a break from Obama’s dovish instincts. It seems she’ll be a powerful secretary of state. I don’t think the Syrians and Iranians will like it." Eh, well, they’re rarely happy with the United States, so we can’t see Clinton making that much difference in that respect.