Stripping away the tawdry details and media spectacle of the Monica Lewinsky affair, President Clinton undoubtedly faces an accelerating and politically risky few weeks now that he has decided to give his version of events to a grand jury on August 17th. The American people believe he is doing a good job with the presidency even if they doubt his word on his precise relationship with the young woman, which they regard as largely a private matter. But if he retracts his denials of a sexual liaison with Ms Lewinsky (thereby admitting he perjured himself the first time round), or, more seriously, is shown by evidence, other than her word, to have lied about it in this formal legal setting (thereby committing a second perjury), he will be in real jeopardy, certainly vulnerable to popular disenchantment and to pressure for impeachment just as the congressional elections loom in the autumn. Even if he survives such an ordeal it would be at the cost of his credibility and authority for the remaining period in office.
So, despite the endless triviality of this affair and the widespread suspicion that it has been driven by collusion between obsessively prurient right-wing groups and media, it nonetheless has the clear potential for real political damage. Where that damage falls will be determined by events and the unfolding evidence. The granting of legal immunity to Ms Lewinsky has led to much speculation and some apparently well-informed reportage as to what her evidence will be.
It would be ill-advised to draw conclusions at this stage, other than to welcome Mr Clinton's decision to give evidence to the grand jury as politically wise if legally risky. Unless he has a great deal to hide, his political stature and popularity can carry him through the crisis. He is famously resilient and at his political best in a tight corner, even if this scandal seems to be as much a product of his own recklessness as of any conspiracy against him. The affair is just as risky for his Republican opponents, given the sceptical public mood and suspicion that it has been cooked up by far-right groups incapable of finding other issues on which to attack him. Congressional Republicans will be reluctant to proceed against Mr Clinton on trivial grounds and afraid of a prolonged debate against the background of what is publicly perceived to have been his capable political record in office during a period of economic buoyancy. It is, of course, as much an international as a domestic affair, given the continuing power and influence of the United States around the world. There will be many leaders (not least in Ireland) who would agree with Mr Tony Blair's remarks yesterday that Mr Clinton "is a tremendous person to work with, not just in Northern Ireland but across a range of international issues . . . he's elected to tackle the things that are important". A strong and effective US presidency and a consistent US foreign policy are important for world politics and the world economy - quite aside from whether one approves of them or not. If Mr Clinton is badly weakened by this affair, the prospects of handling effectively such issues as the Asian economic crisis, the transition to the euro, relations with China and Russia, the Middle East peace process - not to mention the one in Northern Ireland - would be affected. It is very much to be hoped, therefore, that this business can be swiftly and clearly resolved by the due legal process that is now in train.