The departure of former vice-president Al Gore from the 2004 presidential race opens the door for lesser-known candidates. One possibility: General Wesley Clark, the former supreme allied commander who ran President Bill Clinton’s Kosovo War. Although Clark told CNN last month that he wasn’t a candidate, Gore’s departure could change all that. In recent months, the general has been quietly meeting with Democratic donors in Los Angeles and New York. Back in October, he made a brief foray into New Hampshire to endorse Democratic congressional candidate Katrina Swett. " He is taking a very serious, hard look at it, " says one supporter. " I know it’s something he wants to do. "

Clark visited Boston back in October and expressed concern about a potential war with Iraq. " Force is not a substitute for diplomacy, " he told the Boston Globe’s Scot Lehigh. " We should act multilaterally whenever we can and unilaterally only when we must. " With security at the forefront of public consciousness since September 11, a candidate with Clark’s military credentials could help immunize the Democrats from Republican attacks that the party is soft on foreign policy. There is some belief in Democratic circles that Clark would make a strong addition to a 2004 Democratic ticket — perhaps as a vice-presidential candidate. Massachusetts senator John Kerry, a Vietnam veteran, and Clark would make a formidable pairing, for example.

" The idea does have an asset, " says Clinton’s former secretary of agriculture, Dan Glickman, who now is the director of the Institute of Politics at Harvard’s Kennedy School. " He’s strong and understands national-security issues. " Adds William Galston, a professor in the School of Public Affairs at the University of Maryland: " No one can accuse him of either ignorance or lack of commitment in the area of defense. "

It was once common in American history for successful generals to run for president. George Washington is the most famous example, but early presidents also included Andrew Jackson, hero of the battle of New Orleans; William Henry Harrison, who led the troops at the battle of Tippecanoe; and Zachary Taylor, who commanded troops in the Mexican-American War. Later examples include Ulysses S. Grant and Dwight D. Eisenhower. A run by Clark would bear some resemblance to George McClellan’s 1864 challenge as a Democrat to Republican incumbent Abraham Lincoln (McClellan, a former Union Army commander, ran against Lincoln from the left) — with the difference being that Clark was a much more successful general than McClellan.

Not everyone is so sanguine about a run by Clark. Eliot Cohen, the author of Supreme Command: Soldiers, Statesmen, and Leadership in Wartime (Free Press, 2002), maintains that military candidates aren’t necessarily well suited for political life. " In general, the record of generals running for president is a lot worse than people think unless [the candidates] are really major figures, " says Cohen. " It’s very exciting for the first couple of weeks. Then they actually go out and campaign, and they don’t like it anymore. "

Both Cohen and Alan Brinkley, an American-history professor at Columbia, also point out that while Clark is well known and respected for his work in the Kosovo War, he is not as well known as other former generals who became president.

Still, Clark has a few qualities that Democrats should find interesting. The Arkansan would be a Southerner in a field with just one other candidate from that region — North Carolina senator John Edwards. He would also be a fresh face, one not as closely associated with the grind of politics as the other candidates.