Rice, by contrast, has worked successfully to strengthen the US position at the UN, even at the risk of offending conservatives in Congress. She won White House support to oppose legislation, sponsored by Rep. Henry Hyde (R-IL), chairman of the House International Relations Committee, to require the United States to withhold as much as 50 percent of US dues to the UN. She assigned Nicholas Burns, the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, to take charge of the UN reform portfolio, challenging Bolton for control of the issue. She adopted a comprehensive US position on expansion of the Security Council so that the United States is seen as supportive of broader representation, rather than hostile.

Least noticed, but most significant, she bucked conservatives on the issue of the International Criminal Court, instructing the United States to abstain, rather than oppose referral of the names of alleged Sudanese war criminals to the ICC for prosecution. That abstention effectively changed US policy from active opposition to acceptance of and cooperation with the Court. I have described this as a 180-degree shift in administration policy. Conservative opponents of the Court agree with this assessment, while many of my fellow Democrats have not grasped the significance of this vote, or say it is too early to pay the administration this compliment.