SEPT. 11 COMMISSION Rice's testimony before panel comes at a critical time in the war on terror

Some have questioned the adviser's demeanor in recent interviews.
LOS ANGELES TIMES
WASHINGTON -- Rarely has so much seemed to hinge on a single government official stepping into the glare of television lights and raising a right hand before God and country.
But Thursday, when Condoleezza Rice becomes the first national security adviser to journey to Capitol Hill to testify, in public and under oath, she must defend her president and his actions on his most fundamental constitutional duty: protecting the nation's security.
What is potentially pivotal about Rice's appearance before the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks is that she will testify at a critical moment.
Bush has made fighting terrorism the centerpiece of his presidency, and the war in Iraq is the centerpiece of his fight against terrorism. Yet American voters are expressing increasing doubts about his handling of the war as U.S. troops face deadly new attacks.
Importance
Rice's immediate task will be to answer questions about the past, but the larger challenge will be about the future -- whether her performance reassures the public or adds to its unease.
"It may be one of those moments when we look back and say 'before' or 'after' Condoleezza Rice's testimony," said James Hilty, a specialist in the presidency at Temple University. "She has become the prime defender of the administration's national security policy."
While no historical parallel is exact, there have been similar moments. Marine Lt. Col. Oliver L. North, appearing ramrod straight in full uniform before congressional investigators, wrapped President Reagan's Iran-Contra policies in a mantle of patriotism that critics could not penetrate. During Watergate, on the other hand, the unshakable testimony of White House Counsel John Dean began the unraveling of Richard Nixon's presidency.
Rice's ability
Rice, testifying in public after weeks of resistance by the White House, brings a mixture of assets and liabilities to her task.
In Bush's words this week, "She's a very smart, capable person who knows exactly what took place, and will lay out the facts. ... I'm looking forward to people hearing her."
But others are less confident, at least privately. Many Bush loyalists were dismayed by Rice's demeanor in recent TV interviews, when she appeared defensive and combative. "She was shrill, and she isn't normally," said one former National Security Council colleague. "You could hear the agitation in her voice."
And the string of decisions and events that led Rice to be called before the panel gives her little choice but to face the issues head-on.
For one thing, at the outset of the new administration, Bush and Rice decided to keep Richard Clarke -- a veteran of the first Bush and the Clinton administrations -- in his job as National Security Council counterterrorism director. Second, in a break with past practice, the president insisted that Clarke report to him exclusively through Rice.
That made Rice solely responsible for what the president learned about appraisals of terrorist threats from Clarke and others in the months before Sept. 11. She was also responsible for coordinating counterterrorism efforts, including ranking its priority relative to other threats and problems.