In moving Condoleezza Rice from the National Security Council to become his nominee for Secretary of State, it may look as if George W. Bush is just rearranging his foreign policy furniture. This shift is, though, more significant. Dr Rice is astute, intelligent, loyal — and enigmatic. For the past four years, her principal role has been to act as an honest broker for the President while political heavyweights such as Colin Powell and Donald Rumsfeld offered different views on the direction of international relations. She will now no longer be a personal confidante or a referee but a major player shaping US policy.

There is every chance, furthermore, that she will soon be the main actor in this arena. Mr Rumsfeld is not expected to serve any more than another 18 months at the Pentagon. The CIA is set for a long period of introspection. The next National Security Adviser, Stephen Hadley, Dr Rice’s old deputy, is unlikely to rush to challenge her. She will thus quickly become the face and voice of American foreign policy.

The range of issues ahead of her is extensive. Part of her brief, however, is to recast her own department as well as the specifics of what to do about Iraq, Iran, North Korea, the Middle East peace process and other hot topics. General Powell was popular with career diplomats, but even he could not offset the impression that a self-satisfied State Department did not pack the punch in Washington it once did. Dr Rice should aspire both to elevate the standing of her domain and to encourage reform within it.

Even those who are sympathetic to the objectives of the Bush Administration’s foreign policy have to concede that it has an image problem. Some of the opponents of what the President has tried to do are implacably hostile to him (and often the United States) and there is no point in launching a charm offensive towards them. There are others who, by contrast, can see that the War on Terror must be seen through and approve of the drive to spread democracy. Yet they have been left uneasy by aspects of US policy.

Dr Rice is a strong communicator and should be willing to devote more time to explaining America to overseas audiences. She would surely be assisted in this if Mr Bush chose to break with a long-established but misguided American practice and appoint serious professionals to be ambassadors. This is not an era in which the US can afford to be represented abroad by affluent, if well-intentioned, amateurs. There is also a case for a more aggressive recruitment drive for new entrants to the American diplomatic service and to encourage a more diverse range of ideas and thinking.

Dr Rice’s personal story, much like that of General Powell, is another reminder of the extraordinary character of American society. Unfortunately, the caricature that is cherished by the smug and the ignorant is far better known in this country. A fresh secretary of state at the outset of a potentially fascinating term provides a welcome chance to present America as she is, not how her enemies would paint her.