Susan Elizabeth Rice was born on November 17, 1964. She is a foreign policy expert and is now the American Ambassador to the United States. The two ambassadors who came before her were Kofi Annan, and Ban Ki-Moon.
Barack Obama has chosen Susan E.Rice to be the ambassador of the United Nations. According to a recent article in The New York Times, Ms.Rice will hopefully help stop major problems even if it means using armed forces to help solve those problems. Problems can include the recent genocide cases that have taken place in Darfur. According to this article, Experts believe that Obama is serious about spreading positive change, the reason they believe such a statement is because he chose Susan E.Rice who is Obama's "closest advisors, so it underscores how much of a priority he's making the position." She is a good candidate for this position because she is not afraid to face whatever she has to in order to prevent a crisis from happening. “Admirers said she is a good listener and able to stand up to strong personalities, including foreign autocrats and militants in volatile regions of the world.” (www.nytimes.com) The reason I believe Ms.Susan Rice is going to be an excellent United Nations Ambassador to the United States is because, according to the article, she visited Rwanda in 1994 right after the genocide. After she saw millions of bodies lying on the ground, she promised herself that she would never let this happen if she ever was in charge of managing or even being part of the UN. “I swore to myself that if I ever faced such a crisis again, I would come down on the side of dramatic action, going down in flames if that was required,” she told the Atlantic Monthly in 2001.
For more information, please click here.
1 comment:
Genocide is, shamefully, a commonly overlooked issue in relation to politics and political action pertaining to preventing genocide or providing genocide relief. It is an interesting move by President-Elect Obama to begin to shift more focus onto this issue by employing an individual who has been known to advocate action against genocide. However, one still does need to take into consideration the purpose of this action... is this a genuine effort to establish someone to a position of power so that they might be able to act more upon issues pertaining to genocide, or is this merely a show of sorts to gain additional support from individuals with more humanitarian-based mindsets? I would certainly hope the former - but I've been disappointed before. More often than not (at least previously), such instances relating to positions of political power "attempting" to take action against genocidal movements served nothing more than to look good on paper. Not unlike that of the genocide in Rwanda (which took long enough to even be determined as a "genocide" by the international political bureaucracy), high-ranking political figures address the issue of genocide and condemn those in advocation of it - but ultimately fail to do anything significant to prevent the deaths of so many people (over 800,000 killed in the first 100 days, if memory serves). One can only hope that President-Elect Obama will be true to his word with his promises for change.
Post a Comment