This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/14/us/politics/rice-drops-bid-for-secretary-of-state-white-house-says.html

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 3 Version 4
Rice Drops Bid for Secretary of State, Citing Opposition Under Fire, Rice Ends Bid to Succeed Clinton As Secretary of State
(about 2 hours later)
WASHINGTON — Susan E. Rice, the Obama administration’s ambassador to the United Nations, has withdrawn her name from consideration for secretary of state, in the face of relentless opposition from Republicans in Congress over her role in the aftermath of the deadly attack on the American Mission in Benghazi, Libya. WASHINGTON — President Obama knew before he picked up the phone on Thursday afternoon what Susan E. Rice, his ambassador to the United Nations, was calling about: she wanted to take herself out of the running for secretary of state and spare him a fight.
In a letter to President Obama, Ms. Rice said she concluded that “the confirmation process would be lengthy, disruptive and costly — to you and to our most pressing national and international priorities. The tradeoff is simply not worth it to our country.” By acceding to Ms. Rice’s request, which she had conveyed to White House aides the night before, Mr. Obama averted a bitter, potentially disruptive battle with Republicans in Congress at the start of his second term and at a time when his administration is struggling to reach a politically difficult deal on the federal budget.
Mr. Obama, who spoke with Ms. Rice on Thursday, said he accepted her request with regret, describing her as “an extraordinarily capable, patriotic, and passionate public servant.” In a statement, the president praised Ms. Rice and expressed some anger over the withering criticism directed at her by Republicans because of  comments she made in the aftermath of the lethal attack on the American mission in Benghazi, Libya.
He said she “will continue to serve as our ambassador at the United Nations and a key member of my cabinet and national security team.” “While I deeply regret the unfair and misleading attacks on Susan Rice in recent weeks,” he said, “her decision demonstrates the strength of her character, and an admirable commitment to rise above the politics of the moment to put our national interests first.”
“While I deeply regret the unfair and misleading attacks on Susan Rice in recent weeks, her decision demonstrates the strength of her character, and an admirable commitment to rise above the politics of the moment to put our national interests first,” Mr. Obama’s statement said. By all accounts, Ms. Rice had been Mr. Obama’s first choice to succeed Hillary Rodham Clinton, though recently he seemed to be signaling that her nomination was far from a foregone conclusion. Her decision to withdraw, which senior officials insist Ms. Rice made without prodding from the White House, clears the way for Mr. Obama to nominate Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts and chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, officials said.
The president had steadfastly defended Ms. Rice from assertions that she misled the American public in televised appearances after the attack in Benghazi, which killed four Americans, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens. And until Thursday, Mr. Obama seemed ready to face down Ms. Rice’s critics on Capitol Hill. Republicans say Mr. Kerry would sail through a confirmation process, while several senators had vowed to block Ms. Rice’s nomination, citing what they said were her misleading statements about the Sept. 11 attack that killed four Americans, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens.
The most vociferous of them was Senator John McCain of Arizona, but several other Republicans had joined in sharply questioning her suitability for the job. By stepping aside, Ms. Rice will allow Mr. Obama to present a full slate of appointees to his national security team, as early as next week. Among the other candidates for key posts, officials said, is former Senator Chuck Hagel, a Nebraska Republican, for secretary of defense. Like Mr. Kerry, Mr. Hagel, a Vietnam veteran who opposed the Iraq war, would be supported by many of his former colleagues.
One defender, Senator John Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat who has often been mentioned as another candidate to become secretary of state, was among the first on Thursday to issue a statement reacting to Ms. Rice’s withdrawal. Their nominations would also remove a major source of tension between the White House and Congressional Republicans, who had expanded their attack on Ms. Rice from Benghazi to a broader indictment of her record as a policy maker on Africa, her role in securing American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania that came under terrorist attack, and even her personal finances.
“I’ve defended her publicly and wouldn’t hesitate to do so again because I know her character and I know her commitment,” Mr. Kerry said. “She’s an extraordinarily capable and dedicated public servant. Today’s announcement doesn’t change any of that. We should all be grateful that she will continue to serve and contribute at the highest level. Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican from South Carolina and one of Ms. Rice’s fiercest critics, said Thursday that he respected her decision, but added in a statement that he planned “to continue working diligently to get to the bottom of what happened in Benghazi.”
“As someone who has weathered my share of political attacks and understands on a personal level just how difficult politics can be, I’ve felt for her throughout these last difficult weeks, but I also know that she will continue to serve with great passion and distinction,” he added. In a letter she sent to Mr. Obama before her call, Ms. Rice attributed her decision to a recognition that “the confirmation process would be lengthy, disruptive and costly — to you and to our most pressing national and international priorities. The trade-off is simply not worth it to our country.”
In a brief excerpt of an interview to be shown on the NBC News program “Rock Center” on Thursday evening, the network quoted Ms. Rice as saying that she “didn’t want to see a confirmation process that was very prolonged, very politicized, very distracting, and very disruptive.” Mr. Obama said he accepted her request with regret, describing her in a statement as “an extraordinarily capable, patriotic, and passionate public servant” with a “limitless capability to serve our country” — a line that one official said signaled that Ms. Rice, who will continue in her job at the United Nations, remains a candidate for other senior posts, including national security adviser.
The debate over Ms. Rice had been a significant distraction during the Obama administration’s transition between its first and second terms, as many changes in top positions are expected, and difficult negotiations over resolving the nation’s fiscal crisis are dominating the domestic agenda. Republicans are eager to see a new appointee, and should it be Mr. Kerry, his party’s 2004 presidential nominee, he would receive a far different reception.  “She made her own decision and I think it’s the right decision,” said Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming, a member of the Foreign Relations Committee. “I think she would have had a very hard time getting through.” Mr. Kerry, by contrast, is “immensely qualified and he would be easily confirmed,” he said.
In the interview with NBC’s Brian Williams, Ms. Rice said, “We’re talking about comprehensive immigration reform, balanced deficit reduction, job creation — that’s what matters. And to the extent that my nomination could have delayed or distracted or deflected, or maybe even some of these priorities impossible to achieve, I didn’t want that.” For his part, Mr. Kerry heaped praise on Ms. Rice. In a statement, he said, “As someone who has weathered my share of political attacks and understands on a personal level just how difficult politics can be, I’ve felt for her throughout these last difficult weeks, but I also know that she will continue to serve with great passion and distinction.”
It was unusual for so much attention to be focused on a potential nominee to a cabinet post before any selection had been announced, and for the administration to put on a full-court press on behalf of the contender. The drama over Ms. Rice, an outspoken, fast-rising diplomat with close ties to Mr. Obama, began on the Sunday after the Benghazi attack, when she appeared on five television news programs and characterized it as a spontaneous attack gone awry rather than a premeditated terrorist attack. Republicans seized on her remarks in an election-year effort to undermine Mr. Obama’s counterterrorism credentials. Later, after Mr. Obama offered a passionate defense of Ms. Rice, it seemed destined to become a showdown between a re-elected president and Republicans on Capitol Hill.
And it was unorthodox, too, for her to be sent to Capitol Hill to defend herself in meetings with her critics, who only extended and even broadened their attack on her credentials. But in the last two weeks, Mr. Obama tempered his defense of Ms. Rice by noting that he had not made a decision for secretary of state — a sign that he did not want to be hemmed in. Ms. Rice, meanwhile, was put in the position of defending her record for a nomination she had not received. A meeting with Senator Graham and other Republicans critics ended badly.
Some officials said they feared that Mr. Obama was limiting his own maneuvering room by engaging the critics so vehemently. In a television interview last week, Mr. Obama said he did not worry about what “folks say on cable news programs, attacking highly qualified personnel like Susan Rice.” Behind the scenes, his aides said, he was anguished by the choice between Ms. Rice and Mr. Kerry. But some friends of Ms. Rice say the White House could have done more to defend her from the onslaught of attack.
“For them to go after the U.N. ambassador, who had nothing to do with Benghazi and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received and to besmirch her reputation, is outrageous,” the president said at a news conference shortly after the election. Ms. Rice, 48, was strongly supported by Mr. Obama’s closest national security aides, who view her as being in sync with the president’s worldview and a champion of some of his boldest foreign policy initiatives, like the NATO military intervention in Libya.
“When they go after the U.N. ambassador, apparently because they think she’s an easy target, then they’ve got a problem with me,” he continued. “And should I choose — if I think that she would be the best person to serve America in the capacity — the State Department, then I will nominate her.” “People in the White House and Obama orbit care deeply about Susan, and feel strongly that the future will be bright for her,” said Benjamin J. Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser.
An early supporter of Mr. Obama’s presidential campaign, Ms. Rice has cut a wide swath at the United Nations, where she is currently trying to marshal international sanctions in response to North Korea’s launching of a long-range missile this week.
But Ms. Rice became the focal point of criticism for the administration’s handling of the Benghazi attack, and that proved to be only the beginning of her problems. The more Mr. Obama appeared to be leaning toward appointing Ms. Rice, the more critics appeared ready to pile on.
Perhaps the most damaging critique came from Senator Susan Collins, a moderate Republican from Maine. After meeting with Ms. Rice, Ms. Collins said, “I continue to be troubled by the fact that the United Nations ambassador decided to play what was essentially a political role at the height of a contentious presidential election campaign.”
She also raised a new concern: Ms. Rice’s role in protecting embassies in Kenya and Nairobi that were bombed by terrorists in 1998. While those allegations proved groundless, they also echoed decades-old questions that were suddenly being raised about Ms. Rice’s role as an aide on Africa policy during the Clinton administration.
Reporters dug up old anecdotes, like when Ms. Rice, as a young aide in the Clinton White House, once questioned whether the United States should embrace the term “genocide” in Rwanda because it could put President Bill Clinton in an awkward position in midterm elections. For all that, friends of Ms. Rice said she believed she could win nomination and be a successful secretary of state. The hardest part, they said, was explaining to her two children why she had decided to bow out.

Jennifer Steinhauer contributed reporting.