by Susan Rice
I had flown out to Chicago with my parents, Ian, and the kids to be there as Obama, joined by Vice President–elect Joe Biden, took to the podium to speak to the seriousness of the moment—with his signature optimism.
Obama prefaced our introductions by providing an overview of the national security challenges facing the nation, calling them “just as grave—and just as urgent—as our economic crisis.” As Obama had argued during the campaign, economic power went hand in hand with military might as foundations of our national power. Now, he stressed, “America must also be strong at home to be strong abroad.”
Sharing his vision of the complex world he was about to inherit, President-elect Obama posited, “The common thread linking these challenges is the fundamental reality that in the twenty-first century, our destiny is shared with the world’s. From our markets to our security, from our public health to our climate, we must act with the understanding that, now more than ever, we have a stake in what happens across the globe.”
Clearly outlining the mandate of the team I was joining—along with Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, Robert Gates, who would remain as secretary of defense, Eric Holder as attorney general, Janet Napolitano as secretary of homeland security, and General James Jones as national security advisor—Obama declared: “We will show the world once more that America is relentless in the defense of our people, steady in advancing our interests, and committed to the ideals that shine as a beacon to the world: democracy and justice; opportunity and unyielding hope—because American values are America’s greatest export to the world.”
Obama, introducing me next to last, called me a “close and trusted advisor,” and added that he saw the role of permanent representative of the United States to the United Nations as a crucial one. My job would be to represent the U.S. to the world at the only body that included all its 193 nation-states. “Representing” means showing up, being in charge, speaking with authority, and negotiating to advance American interests. Every word I uttered, every step I took, would be closely watched and judged, but I felt ready.
“As in previous administrations,” President-elect Obama noted, “the U.N. ambassador will serve as a member of my cabinet and an integral member of my team. Her background as a scholar, on the National Security Council, and Assistant Secretary of State will serve our nation well at the United Nations. Susan knows the global challenges we face demand global institutions that work. She shares my belief that the U.N. is an indispensable and imperfect forum. She will carry the message that our commitment to multilateral action must be coupled with a commitment to reform.”
At the press conference, each nominee gave short remarks. In mine, I repeated a line that I had used frequently, first in crafting Obama’s remarks during the campaign and later in my own speeches: “To enhance our common security, we must invest in our common humanity.” It is a statement that still reflects my view of how America should best lead in the world, even after years of testing.
In the conference room, where the nominees convened briefly with Obama and Biden before the announcement, I saw Hillary Clinton for the first time since the campaign began. I congratulated her and told her I looked forward to working with her. She was polite but a little cool, until after the event when it came time to greet my family. Then she could not have been more gracious, and I continue to prize a picture we all took together with a very small Maris posed adorably in front of Hillary, whom she already quite admired.
My next order of business was to be confirmed by the Senate as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and to get ready for the Big Leagues. Like other nominees, I was given a small team of experts to help guide and prepare me for the hearing with massive briefing books and “murder boards”—intensive mock hearings where I was peppered with tough questions that could arise. They also set up obligatory meetings in advance of the hearing with members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which turned out to be uneventful. Indeed, the whole confirmation process could not have proceeded more swiftly or smoothly. Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Evan Bayh of Indiana, both of whom I had known previously, kindly agreed to introduce me to the committee.
Senator Collins began, “The people of Maine are proud of what this remarkable woman has accomplished in her distinguished career of service to our nation, and we take special pride in her strong ties to our state.” After detailing my family’s history in Maine going back to the early twentieth century, she explained that we first met “when we were both participants in a series of seminars sponsored by the Aspen Strategy Group.” Collins continued, “I was so impressed with her brilliance and nuanced insight as I listened to her discuss various foreign policy challenges. I knew at that time that she was a real star.” Finally, she concluded, “I can think of… no better messenger than Dr. Susan Rice. I am honored to present her to this distinguished committee, and I enthusiastically endorse her nomination.”
Collins’s comments were so generous that committee chairman John Kerry quipped, “What a wonderful introduction. Remind me that if I am ever in need of an introduction, I want to put in my reservation right now. It does not get better than that.” The rest of my hearing proceeded in the same vein, with Maris providing the only drama by silently frolicking and dancing in the aisle of the hearing room. Senators from both parties asked important and serious questions, but there was no rancor, and I committed no fumbles. One week later, on January 22, for the second time in my career, I was unanimously confirmed by the Senate. Three days later, I went to work at the U.N. on behalf of the American people.
Monday mornings began the same way for four and a half years.
A rushed awakening, shower, dress, kiss Ian and the kids goodbye, dash out the door to jump in the big armored SUV with just my briefcase and a small day bag, and speed to National Airport. For me and my Diplomatic Security (DS) agents—who protected me in both Washington and New York—the airport runs became an adrenaline-rushed game to see how close we could cut it and still make the shuttle to or from New York. Usually, I could leave home in D.C. at 7:30 a.m. and just make the eight o’clock shuttle to La Guardia. Once at the airport, we walked briskly (as heels made running inadvisable) around the security checkpoint, down the corridor, and straight onto the plane, with the gate agents variously scowling or hailing our just-in-time arrival.
Usually the last to board, with one DS agent accompanying me, I would settle into my coach seat and read my briefing materials and newspapers in preparation for the day ahead. The dash to the plane got my juices flowing and, barring a weather delay or a rare traffic impediment, we made it to New York in time for me to be in my office or the chair behind the “United States of America” plaque at the United Nations Security Council before the 10 a.m. session began.
Three days after President Obama’s inauguration, and one day after I was confirmed, on January 23, 2009, I was sworn in to office. The following Monday, when I first arrived in New York to start my tenure as U.S. permanent representative to the United Nations, Ian and I began a whole new long-distance balancing act. He had recently been promoted to executive producer of the Washington, D.C.–based This Week, ABC News’s Sunday show, and the kids were well-ensconced in schools they liked—both factors that made moving the family to New York a nonstarter. In D.C., Ian had the support of my mom, who was a hands-on grandparent, and our indispensable nanny, Adela Jimenez. So, for four and a half years, I commuted, and our kids saw me mainly on the weekends. It’s difficult to assess the impact of losing that time at home. I know how hard it was for me to be removed from the daily lives of Jake and Maris and fully appreciated how much my absence placed added burdens on Ian.
By the time I arrived in New York, I had assembled a small but first-rate team to help me run the U.S. Mission. Some, like my wise and savvy chief of staff Brooke Anderson and foreign service officer Erica Barks-Ruggles, my deputy who ran our Washington office, had been colleagues and friends since the Clinton administration. Others, like my senior advisors El
izabeth Cousens, a good friend since Oxford, and Salman Ahmed, whom I had not met before the transition, were deeply experienced experts who had worked for years in and around the U.N.
My principal deputy was Ambassador Alejandro “Alex” Wolff, whom I first met in the 1990s when he was executive assistant to Secretary Albright. A deeply experienced foreign service officer with an impish grin and an accompanying mischievous streak, he had also worked as deputy under my two immediate predecessors, Zalmay Khalilzad and John Bolton. Alex knew everything and everybody at the Mission and the U.N. and helped ensure I met the right ambassadors and U.N. officials in the correct order, and that I was well-briefed on their comparative strengths and weaknesses. Alex assisted me with plotting strategy on tough issues and managed the budget, day-to-day operations, and personnel at the Mission. This freed me to represent the U.S. in the Security Council, before the press, at events and receptions, and to lead the Mission through the most consequential debates and negotiations.
President Obama came to office with a clear vision of his foreign policy principles and priorities. My primary goal as U.S. ambassador was to advance his objectives through the United Nations. First and foremost, Obama had to deal with the complex challenges he inherited, chiefly: preventing a global economic meltdown; responsibly winding down major ground wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; and degrading Al Qaeda while bringing to justice Osama bin Laden, who remained at large.
On top of this, Obama set out to seize fresh opportunities and confront threats that would peak in coming decades. Asia, the emerging center of gravity for the global economy and geopolitical competition, is where Obama sought to rebalance U.S. resources and attention. To make the world more secure, he prioritized stemming nuclear weapons proliferation, locking down “loose” nuclear material and an arms reduction treaty with Russia, while envisioning “the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons.” Similarly, Obama invested in combating climate change, while strengthening our cyber defenses and global health security.
At a broader level, President Obama understood upon taking office that his overarching goal must be to renew America’s global leadership. As we had agreed during our first substantive policy conversation over dinner at Tony Lake’s house in 2005, Obama viewed America’s strength and prosperity as inextricably linked to that of others; we do not live in a zero-sum world. When America cooperates and inspires, when we lift up others, we tap into common aspirations for dignity and opportunity, rather than stoke fear and disunity. That is how America best attracts others to our cause and tackles issues that matter most to Americans’ security and prosperity.
Obama was adamant that the United States cannot and should not bear the burden of global leadership alone, especially not through military means. We needed to use all elements of our national strength, not only the best military but also the top diplomats and development experts in the world. America also had to resist the temptation to overreach and overcommit, because there are limits both to our resources and to our influence, particularly our ability to solve problems within other states.
Above all, Obama emphasized that the U.S. could not lead from a position of strength abroad if we were not strong at home. Facing the Great Recession, Obama focused early on jump-starting America’s economic recovery, creating jobs, reforming Wall Street, and making health care accessible to all. Internationally, he worked to broker high-standards free trade agreements, including the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, which would boost U.S. exports and employment while providing greater protections for labor and the environment.
To confront tough global issues effectively, we would build diplomatic coalitions to work with us. That’s where the United Nations came in. The administration frequently sought U.N. Security Council authorization when it would enhance the legitimacy of our efforts and our ability to rally partners to our side. After the excesses of the “war on terrorism,” America also needed to lead by example, including by banning torture, working to close Guantánamo, and standing firmly in support of American values—democracy, universal human rights, and the rule of law.
At the same time, Obama sought to bind recalcitrant states to their U.N. obligations and international law. With Russia and China, the U.S. was prepared to cooperate when mutually beneficial—from nonproliferation to climate change and global health. Yet we were resolved to confront U.S. adversaries with strength in order to deter and defeat aggression.
Against this backdrop, in President Obama’s view, my job and that of my team was to bridge old divides, find common ground where possible, stand tough when necessary, and forge collective solutions that would help us confront the most intractable global challenges.
It was a tall order, especially since I arrived to find (unsurprisingly) that the U.S. was not in good standing at the U.N. We had lost ground due to bruising battles over the Iraq War and the bullying style of U.S. ambassador John Bolton, my predecessor once removed, who once famously said: “The Secretariat building in New York has 38 stories. If it lost 10 stories, it wouldn’t make a bit of difference.” Under President George W. Bush, the U.S. frequently opposed progress on issues of greatest concern to the majority of U.N. member states. From indigenous rights to access to food and clean water, from climate change to women’s reproductive rights, the U.S. had been viewed as indifferent or even hostile to many issues that mattered most to developing countries.
I set out to change that. My principal initial challenge was to improve the perception of the U.S. at the U.N. by pursuing goals that served not only U.S. interests but those of most U.N. member states. In my early days, I often encountered resistance from some of the career officers at the Mission when I suggested that the U.S. should change its position on a particular issue. For instance, the U.S. had historically objected to language in U.N. General Assembly resolutions recognizing that people had a “right to food.” I understood the institutional urge to resist the creation of new “rights,” but for the new Obama administration to argue that people didn’t have an existential need to eat seemed completely nonsensical. When I pressed on why we opposed something like this, I was told, “That’s how we’ve always done it.” That answer was tantamount to waving red at a bull. We would not object to the “right to food” and, henceforth, I insisted that we would need persuasive, substantive reasons to maintain such controversial positions. “How we have always done it” would not cut it.
More broadly, under my leadership, the U.S. Mission championed human rights and the fight against global poverty. We prioritized climate change as both a genuine threat to U.S. national security and an existential concern for small island nations. We recommitted to the basic bargain of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, whereby those possessing nuclear weapons agreed to strive to eliminate them, as they concurrently stopped all others from acquiring them. The U.S. enthusiastically promoted the U.N. Millennium Development Goals, the advancement of women and protection of their reproductive rights, and finally signed the U.N. convention to support the rights of persons with disabilities.
I was especially committed to achieving progress on LGBT rights. While not a popular cause with many U.N. member states, I have long viewed this as the last major frontier in the battle for civil and human rights. With strong backing from Washington, over the course of four and a half years, I pushed the envelope as far as I could at the U.N. The U.S. joined the Core Group of countries at the U.N. committed to LGBT rights. We championed pro-LGBT resolutions at the U.N. Human Rights Council and the accreditation of the first LGBT NGOs by the U.N. We backed fair and equitable treatment of LGBT employees at the U.N. I am particularly proud that the U.S. demanded and, after some serious diplomatic combat, ultimately achieved the inclusion of LGBT persons as among those groups protected from extrajudicial killing in a landmark 2010 General Assembly resolution. On issues of human dignity and broadening economic opportunity, the battles we fought marked a clear departure from the positions of the previous administration.
I
n charting this new course, I had a few things working in my favor. There was tremendous international excitement and goodwill toward President Obama. People at the U.N., as around the world, had high hopes and wanted him to succeed. Secretary Clinton and senior officials at the State Department were like-minded philosophically and supportive of me, despite occasional disagreements we had over particular policy issues. I was familiar with the U.N. from my prior tenure at the NSC and the State Department during the Clinton administration. The U.N. secretary-general, Ban Ki-moon, was generally favorably disposed toward the United States. And I was coming not too far on the heels of the infamous John Bolton.
At the same time, I enjoyed a high degree of latitude. President Obama made clear to his team at the White House and at the State Department that he had full confidence in my judgment and abilities. To most in Washington, New York was out of sight and out of mind, which afforded me considerable flexibility and breathing room. No one questioned me on day-to-day decisions or tactics and, if they interfered, their efforts typically failed. On big issues, such as the Middle East, Iran, and North Korea, or whether to join the Human Rights Council, I did need Washington’s blessing on our approach; and then colleagues usually accepted our recommendations.