The Uncertainty of American Foreign Policy

Without question, your friends, family and anyone that surrounds you on a consistent basis will shape and influence your decisions and how you will be viewed by the rest of the world. History has proven over and over again that the character, ideology and decisions displayed in your inner circle provide a usually-accurate assessment of who you are. That reality is no less true for President Obama’s choice of advisers.

President Obama announced Wednesday his selection of UN Ambassador and longtime loyalist Susan Rice to replace Tom Donilon as national security adviser. This new role adds Rice to Obama’s inner circle of advisers, a choice that forces us to make assumptions about the remaining years of his administration. The selection of Rice speaks volumes about the president and what he envisions for the future of American foreign policy.

Obama’s tapping of Rice is an unfortunate move for the safety of Americans and the preservation of our country’s security amongst our enemies overseas. You might remember that Susan Rice appeared on a slew of television shows last September to inform the American people about the cause of attacks on our consulate in Benghazi, Libya. As the country grieved the loss of brave Americans and wanted answers for their deaths, Rice asserted, time after time, that it was an unplanned, spontaneous attack. She then blamed an angry mob formed due to the release of an anti-Muslim video, comparing the situation to recent protests in Cairo, Egypt. However, evidence was quickly uncovered that confirmed it was a deliberate, planned terrorist attack on the twelfth anniversary of September 11, and the nature of the attack was known almost immediately by State Department officials.

On Fox News Sunday on September 16, Rice explained, “The best information and best assessment we have today is that in fact this was not a pre-planned, pre-meditated attack.” What is unsettling about the timing of these words is the fact that an email, which included Rice and numerous State Department officials, was circulated the day after the four Americans were murdered in our consulate. Before her false assertions were made to the media, she had already received an email that clearly stated the attacks were the doing of Islamic terrorists; there was no reference to protestors or an angry mob. Why then, did Rice choose to misinform the American people about the situation during this appearance and others, blaming a “heinous” video?

There is no question that Rice and the president are close. She advised him on foreign policy in his first campaign. He appointed her as UN Ambassador. She was his first choice to replace Hilary Clinton as secretary of state, but understandably, concerns abounded from senators, whose confirmation was needed to place her in the position. Due to her involvement in the Benghazi scandal and mounting concerns after meetings with groups of senators, she pulled her own name from the nomination. Despite the fact Rice was part of an effort to deliberately mislead the American people about the nature of the attack on our diplomatic post in Benghazi, the president has chosen to elevate her to the position of national security advisor. That decision will rightfully raise doubts among the public about the trustworthiness and transparency of presidential pronouncements on foreign policy.

As national security adviser and newest member of his inner circle, Obama will depend on Rice for coordinating and shaping America’s role in foreign policy. When it comes to foreign policy, the American people deserve leaders they can trust and presidential statements they can believe. In choosing Susan Rice to serve as his national security advisor, the president has placed personal loyalty above public credibility. As a result, the American people will inevitably wonder about the counsel the president is getting and the reliability of White House pronouncements on foreign affairs.