Return to: Home | Politics

The fall of Condi

Andrew Stephen

Published 06 September 2007

The US secretary of state was feted as "brilliant" and "gifted", but her tenure is now acknowledged as a disastrous failure.

How things change. It was less than three years ago that the British embassy here put on a ludicrously lavish extravaganza to mark the 50th birthday of the person whom they wrongly considered to be the most powerful woman in the world. "Dr" Condoleezza Rice, then George W Bush's disastrously inept national security adviser and now his equally feckless secretary of state, walked into the ambassador's residence and gasped when she was met by more than a hundred guests lining the curved Lutyens double staircase, applauding fervently and singing "Happy Birthday to You".

The British ambassador, Sir David Manning, had thought of everything with his team: much to the relief of the woman who had arrived in slacks and a suede jacket, thinking she was going out for dinner with her aunt, Manning and his staff had obtained her measurements beforehand and were able to whisk her away so that she could change into a scarlet ballgown, specially made for the occasion by her favourite designer, Oscar de la Renta. Her very own hairdresser, whom the embassy had also thoughtfully provided, snipped away. And the honoured guest finally joined the throng as Van Cliburn, considered (again wrongly) to be America's greatest pianist, hammered out the national anthem.

The full extent of the Iraq catastrophe was already beginning to dawn on most of Washington, but the British had always been peculiarly bewitched by Rice - dating back to pre-invasion days when Manning, then Tony Blair's foreign policy adviser at 10 Downing Street, talked to her practically every day over the transatlantic phone line. Sir Christopher Meyer, Manning's immediate predecessor, could hardly contain himself when he described Rice a year later in his book DC Confidential: "Extraordinarily gifted . . . can play the piano to a professional standard . . . fine ice-skater . . . brilliant academic career."

This British lovefest, and the resulting mis calculation of both the abilities and importance of Condoleezza Rice, now seem thoroughly emblematic, in a tragicomic kind of way, of what George W Bush - via the lips of Rory Bremner, I have to say - describes as the Bush-Blair "error". The British rightly sussed out that Rice was closer personally to Bush than anybody else in the administration. After all, she spent weekends at Camp David and watched football with him, didn't she? True, very true, but the British government was not sufficiently plugged in to Washington to realise that the Bush administration was hopelessly dysfunctional even before it moved into the White House in January 2001, so much so, that proximity to Bush was virtually valueless from the very beginning.

Flailing around

Bush adopted Rice - black, and a woman - as a kind of mascot for his administration. He is genuinely fond of her, but that doesn't mean he has ever paid any serious attention to what his inexperienced appointee has had to say. He always listened much more closely to hugely experienced Washington infighters such as Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, both of whom considered foreign policy to be part of their portfolios. As national security adviser, Rice flailed around desperately in the middle, letting both men trample all over her, and took command of US foreign policy away from Colin Powell, theoretically Bush's secretary of state, and his deputy, Richard Armitage. "The calamitous consequences [of this] are likely to be felt for years to come," says Zbigniew Brzezinski, US national security adviser himself from 1977-81.

Rice's "brilliance", too, is vastly overstated. Long before Manning's guests wildly cheered her, Washington insiders - ranging from Powell himself to Dubbya's father, the former President Bush - had given up on her. Dick Clarke, chief counter-terrorism adviser on the National Security Council during both the Clinton and Bush II administrations, until he resigned in despair in 2003, tells the story of how he gave a top-secret security briefing about al-Qaeda to Rice during the 2000-2001 transition even before Bush had moved into the White House. It was clear, he says, that she had never even heard of al-Qaeda - and, as a result, was sceptical of everything he had to say.

George Tenet, director of central intelligence for both Bill Clinton and George W Bush until he resigned in despair four months before the British embassy's Ricefest, had a similar experience. In some desperation, he took a senior CIA undercover man as part of a deputation to warn Rice at her White House office on 10 July 2001 that al-Qaeda was planning "spectacular" attacks "designed to inflict mass casualties" against the United States, and that "multiple and simultaneous attacks are possible and they will occur with little or no warning". Rice turned to Clarke and asked: "Dick, is this true?" Clarke leaned forward and buried his face in his hands before managing to croak out, "Yes."

In what has been a pattern of duplicity and truth-shading unrivalled even by the likes of Cheney and Rumsfeld, Rice has subsequently repeatedly denied and/or played down that she received multiple briefings (and memos) such as these. Indeed, practically all of Washington - with the notable exceptions of George W Bush and British diplomats - was privately wringing its hands over Rice's incompetence long before she reached her 50th birthday.

David Kay, chief weapons inspector for the United Nations and then the CIA, called her "probably the worst national security adviser since the office was created". Larry Wilkerson, once Powell's chief of staff at the state department, described her tenure as "a very disastrous four years". Even George H W Bush, according to Bob Woodward in State of Denial, thought she was "not up to the job".

Besmirched by Iraq

Belatedly, and just like the boss to whom she still has undying fealty, Rice now realises that only history can redeem her reputation from being besmirched for ever by the Iraq catastrophe. In this hope, and unprecedentedly for a serving secretary of state, she has been co-operating with a series of biographers. The second and perhaps most important of the resulting books, The Confidante, by the veteran Washington Post journalist Glenn Kessler, came out on 4 September and was hardly reassuring. "She was one of the weakest national security advisers in US history," Kessler concludes. "Her inexperience and her mistakes in that job have shaped the world and coloured the choices she must handle as secretary of state."

How, then, did the Rice phenomenon arise? Partly it is because she has a staggering résumé and is unhindered by self-doubt. She plays the cards life has dealt her, constantly using the phrase "twice as good", for example, meaning that a black person has to be twice as good as a white person to succeed; that has now morphed into the title of one of this year's biographies. I suspect that Bush loves the image of her pulling herself by the bootstraps out of the slums of Alabama - but her suburban upbringing there was actually more middle-class and affluent than those of most of us.

She was the doted-on only child of second-generation college graduates who pressure-cooked her through childhood with a bombardment of piano, ballet, ice-skating and academic lessons; she went to a private, all-girls' Catholic school called St Mary's Academy, and was given her own Steinway grand piano when she was 15. Her family had moved to Colorado when she was 12 because her father was appointed assistant dean at the University of Denver; predictably, she duly pressure-cooked herself through that university, emerging with a doctorate in politics at 26. Earlier, I used inverted commas to highlight her use of "Dr" to describe herself because it is telling; even erstwhile colleagues like Paul Wolfowitz, who earned a doctorate at the University of Chicago before teaching at Yale, would not dream of calling himself "Dr" in the same way.

Résumés, in any case, can be misleading. From Denver, she obtained an assistant professorship in politics at the then troubled Stanford University, working her way up to become second-in-command there, as provost. In her interview for the job, she had expressed enthusiasm for affirmative action for women and minorities. But, once in office, she laid people off, cut services and eliminated courses; the numbers of women and black academics obtaining tenure decreased dramatically under her.

She nevertheless conceded unguardedly at one contentious faculty meeting in 1998 that "I am myself a beneficiary of a Stanford strategy that took affirmative action seriously". Asked why then she was not promoting such policies herself, she replied tartly: "I'm the chief academic officer now." Rice subsequently took a leave of absence from Stanford in 2000 to become George W Bush's not-hugely-successful tutor in foreign affairs, having also put in obligatory stints as director of major corporations such as Chevron (which obligingly renamed its oil tanker Condoleezza Rice the Altair Voyager when she took office).

The rest, sadly, is history - an object lesson in how political fables are created and then implode. Condoleezza Rice, the brilliant Sovietologist who failed to foresee glasnost or the break-up of the Soviet Union; who then wanted to get rid of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty as soon as Bush had peered into Vladimir Putin's soul and seen a decent man; who, warned repeatedly of the dangers of al-Qaeda in 2001, failed even to call a meeting of Bush administration officials to discuss the threat as Clarke had desperately urged her to do, in writing, on 25 January 2001; who ignored warnings of the consequences of not planning for post-invasion Iraq; who knifed old mentors such as Brent Scowcroft and Colin Powell in the back; and whose one forlorn hope of vindication now is that she can somehow bring peace to the Middle East in her remaining 16 months in office. Back at Stanford, there are already organised protests over the prospect of her returning there in 2009.

I'm told that Sir Nigel Sheinwald, who succeeds Manning as British ambassador here this month, is less enamoured of Ms Rice than his two predecessors. She will be 53 in less than two months' time, but for some reason I don't see British taxpayers having to shell out for any opulent Condi spectaculars in 2007. It wouldn't be appropriate and might even seem like bad judgement, somehow.

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

19 comments from readers

section9
06 September 2007 at 14:09

Well, that's what you get for listening to Dick Clarke. Condi had not only mentioned, but went on at length about bin Laden on a radio show in January of 2000, an entire year before the conversation with Clarke took place.

Much of this column is the usual conventional wisdom from the Left foreign policy apparat that waits in vain for a Hillary Presidency. Sadly, you will continue to wait, as you will have to deal with President Giuliani.

gnuneo
06 September 2007 at 21:51

as someone who can hardly be considered an admirer of the bush regime, i have to say this feels a little harsh.

yes, she was inexperienced and the neo-con illuminati rang rings around her (gee - i wonder *why* she got the job?), but as far as i can tell, she has been the main obstacle for an immediate (since 2005), attack on iran, constantly arguing for dialogue instead of a catastrophic military assault.

which gives her a silver star, at least in my book.

Cybertiger
07 September 2007 at 13:13

"which gives her a silver star, at least in my book ..."

... and I would give her a fragrant Yellow Rose ... to sniff at ... under that twinkling Lone Star.

Colonel Blimp
07 September 2007 at 13:19

Condi Rice! Well you would, wouldn't you?

Douglas Chalmers
07 September 2007 at 23:06

As usual, Andrew Stephen, this is another miserable male hatchet job on a woman in a leadership position. You've obviously taken quite a while at 'slaving over a hot keyboard' to get it done, too. So, what's the entree?

I could hardly believe that you have trotted out the inept George Tenet as an excuse for blaming Condi and does anyone still really believe that they all didn't know that 9/11 was an inside job? Maybe only Tenet, then? Hardly. And, it is telling that you should bring up your "erstwhile colleague", Paul Wolfowitz, as somehow being a better person although he was one who made the chilling prediction of a "Pearl Harbor-like" catastrophic incident only a few months before it actually happened.

It seems that you have just gone to the trouble of boring us for the sake of your perhaps not having been invited to "Dr" Condoleezza Rice's 50th birthday party in London. Yet another reason to be less enamoured of you, Andrew Stephen. Do we also have to pity you because Condi's "suburban upbringing there was actually more middle-class and affluent than those of most of us..."??? You poor English sod!

Yes, she is and was "a kind of mascot for his (Bush's) administration" but that is indicative of the "Grand Old Party's" misogynist and racist standing anyway. The token black is nothing new to their brand of politicking. Colin Powell should know. The fact that she is their "most qualified and most experienced person" is something, though, that they still cannot quite bring themselves to countenance in their desperate quest to stay in power.

Ergo
08 September 2007 at 07:06

I don't understand what passes for brilliant these days.

People who can memorize a phone book backwards and forwards? A brilliant member of the Bush government would have resigned when they saw a case of aggression against Iraq unfolding based on false premises; both Powell and Rice were in a position to see it very well and both attempted to give credibility to the government's case of possible nuclear destruction of the US, perhaps imminent, perhaps down the road, unless Saddam and Iraq were taken down. An article about Condi's political immolation is about as fascinating as speculation on Olmert's future. Who gives a damn?

The toll from all the damage they have done is not yet in but there is enough information to assert

unequivocally - these are not brilliant people.

Pierre
08 September 2007 at 15:24

A classic case of education not equalling intelligence

anjijoy
09 September 2007 at 10:33

"build them up, knock them down!

build them up,

knock

them

down!"

JamesV
09 September 2007 at 11:05

I agree with gnuneo. Without Condoleeza Rice, Bush and Cheney might well have already attacked Iran and Syria. Surely a more moderate neo-conservative is a positive thing in an exceedingly right-wing administration?

dumsmure
09 September 2007 at 17:09

I'm amazed by how many of these comments are negative. Andrew Stephen is about the only trustworthy UK journalist writing in the US. Not only is his assessment of Condi (in my opinion) fair and accurate, but it would never be found in the pages of any other magazine or newspaper -- all of whom seem to treat her with baffling respect. He rightly exposes her 'twice as good' shtick -- she was wealthy, middle-class, privileged -- so only needed to be 'half as good' as anyone working-class (white, black, male or female). Her hypocrisy on affirmative action is the hallmark of right-wingers everywhere: never willing to pass charity on, but climbing up the ladder, then pulling it up as quickly as possible. A thought-provoking article.

jbeeemmm
11 September 2007 at 01:31

Your words re Condi Rice are puerile.

I trust you will have the decency to retract when you see the results of the Israeli / Palestine summit in Washington this November.

She deals in results, not hot air.

Douglas Chalmers
11 September 2007 at 05:08

Pity Condi and Barbara Boxer didn't get on well....., duh!

Saila
15 September 2007 at 15:52

I think this woman is dumb and a proven liar, scaring the people of mushroom clouds at the time when Iraq neither had a nuclear device nor a delivery system. She was like her predecessor who brought shame on himself when he was presenting lies to the world at the UN. She was a tool of the Administration, and should be tried together with other war criminals.

JenJen
17 September 2007 at 00:18

I watched Rice testifying at a Congressional hearing a few months ago. She avoided answering most questions by talking incessantly on & on & on so that by the time she finished talking, there was no clear answer yet to the question, yet she had filled up the time. I kept wishing the questioners had ordered her to answer concisely, but they did not. It was like she had a set of prepared statements to make, and nothing would stop her from stringing them together.

I think Rice's purported excellence is simply verbosity. I hate to say it, but she's just a parrot.

My grandmother used to call people like her "educated fools".

Ergo
17 September 2007 at 02:28

Just a comment on Condeleezza Rice's pianistic ability - and it isn't just the jarring counterpose of Beethoven and bombs over Iraq.

It reminds me of the former US Attorney General Ashcroft singing The Eagle Soars at every opportunity and Ronald Reagan's proclivities for Irish songs. These "talents" should be underplayed lest they escalate and become de rigueur talent shows with soft shoe or comic routines and sing-offs incorporated into political campaigns. Call me spoil sport but I believe most candidates are either too light or humourous already, quite without effort, and it's all a sign of the degeneration of politics - or maybe it's just becoming more obvious.

dennyboo
17 September 2007 at 04:37

Is it possible that deep down Miss Rice is really quite shallow?

ikotubo
17 September 2007 at 09:39

This really does seem to be a real hatchet job on the part of Andrew Stephen - so much so that basic facts have been totally ignored. To begin with, although Ms Rice is a Soviet expert, she was not a White House adviser (as far as I know) in the period leading up to the collapse of the Soviet Union - and could not therefore be respnsible for not foreseeing it. In any event, when did the academic fraternity ever become conversant with the real world? Aren't they, by their very nature, "blue-sky" thinkers? In any event, even those who were directly involved in the cold war rivalry also failed to see it coming. So it seems a bit unfair to single her out for blame.

Secondly, contrary to the suggestion that she has been a marginalized figure in George Bush's regime, it was she who became the most vocal advocate of the Iraq war, constantly frightening us with the now infamous phrase "mushroom clouds" in reference to Saddam's non-existent WMDs - and has started using similar phrases in regard to Iran.

Like many, I believe she has used her undoubted talent (and again, she does have talent, contrary to Mr Stephen's beliefs) in the promotion of a very dangerous ideology. And she is a one of those who wants us to believe that Israel (a country with one of the strongest military forces on earth, complete with over 200 nuclear warheads) is a victim of Palestinian occupation and daily barbarity. But these do not justify Mr Stephen's failure to engage with basic facts.

quigster
19 September 2007 at 11:30

Soviet expert!

Here thesis was on soviet tank formations in Czechoslovakia. A real page-turner I bet.

JimmyJames
20 September 2007 at 08:54

She probably thinks that a black woman allegedly from the slums rubbing shoulders with the super-rich and the neo-con mafia and holding a key position in the most powerful country of the world must be nothing short of an act of God. Her appeasement of Israeli brutality in Lebanon and Gaza is inexcusable, but I suspect her biographers will not be too concerned about that

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before you can comment on the website

About the writer

Andrew Stephen

Andrew Stephen was appointed US Editor of the New Statesman in 2001, having been its Washington correspondent and weekly columnist since 1998. He is a regular contributor to BBC news programs and to The Sunday Times Magazine. He has also written for a variety of US newspapers including The New York Times Op-Ed pages. He came to the US in 1989 to be Washington Bureau Chief of The Observer and in 1992 was made Foreign Correspondent of the Year by the American Overseas Press Club for his coverage.

Read More

Vote!

Will Baroness Ashton be an effective EU foreign minister?

Suggest a question

View comments

© New Statesman 1913 – 2009

Tracker