Yesterday morning Condoleezza Rice spoke at Georgetown university on “Transformational Diplomacy.” In the spirit of getting as much out of this DC experience as I can, I decided I'd go to the speech: I don’t agree with a lot of her politics, but I can’t help admiring her for everything she has achieved. There is, too, still an excitement for me that Georgetown brings in people of this caliber—that I have the opportunity to attend these events for free.

That said, I’m not sure what I got out of the experience. Getting into the event in the first place was an ordeal: the doors opened at 8.45 for an event due to start at 10.45. Why? Not only in anticipation of the crowds (in fact, the hall was not entirely full) but to clear security. We weren’t allowed to bring in backpacks (this is a school, right?), computers or cameras, had to remove coats to go through the security checkpoint... I got to the hall at 9.15, and at 10 (the point at which they turned people away—you had to have cleared security 45 minutes in advance or you couldn't get in) had my seat. So, I sat reading William Carlos Williams's poems for three quarters of an hour.

There were some dissonances for me in the speech: for a start, Rice framed her speech as though she were only addressing Americans. While this might not seem unusual at an American university, she addressed her remarks several times to the School of Foreign Service, which attracts a large number of international students to Georgetown.

Of course there was politicking in there—that was always going to be the case. Talking about attempting resolutions to situations that required diplomatic interventions, Rice referred obliquely to the inevitability of “short-term tensions” (how short is short-term?); she referred to moves made by Bush’s administration as “historic”—without irony; at one point she referred to resources being used up by government in the 1990s (no, she didn’t mention Clinton by name—after all, he attended Georgetown). There was the kind of alliteration and snappy rhetoric that a good speechwriter can produce once he gets a good cup of coffee in him.

Nonetheless, a sentiment I really valued was one central to her vision of an effective diplomatic corps: her aim, she said, is “not just recruiting the best and brightest—but making them better and brighter.”