Peter W. Rodman, 1943-2008
Aug 3rd, 2008 by MESH
From Stephen Peter Rosen
Peter Rodman, a member of MESH, passed away on Saturday. I met Peter in 1980 in Santa Monica. I was very junior, he had already worked at the highest levels in government, and was just back from a long trip. But he immediately joined into a serious conversation and worked to include me in it. This seriousness and decency would be visible to me for the next 25 years. In Washington, no matter how high he rose, or what difficulties he faced, he kept the human qualities that made him admirable. He will be sorely missed.
Remembrances are invited from colleagues.
25 Responses to “Peter W. Rodman, 1943-2008”
Posts+Comments
Posts+Comments
Posts+Comments
Posts+Comments
I met Peter Rodman soon after beginning work at the Pentagon in September 2002. He was a true gentleman, humorous, brilliant, and kind. Too many senior Pentagon officials shield themselves with the trappings of office and confuse bluster and ego with leadership. Peter did not. Whereas some officials measured their worth by the numbers of meetings they could attend, Peter understood what leadership meant. He knew the name of every desk officer, and kept time in his schedule to read thoroughly all papers which passed his desk and talk to those who had questions or ideas. It was ironic—but known to all bottom-level worker-bees like myself—that Peter was the only official in the hierarchy who knew exactly what was going on. He did not bother with happy-to-glad edits, but rather asked incisive questions that propelled routine papers into three-dimensional policy that mattered. When he criticized, it was gentle and constructive.
Peter was one of those Pentagon rarities who cared for people and showed it. I have little doubt that all who served under Peter will hold him up as the model of leadership to replicate. His devotion to his family was nothing short of amazing.
Peter was brilliant. His breadth of knowledge was simply incredible; he was walking history and a natural teacher. As documents from his early years were declassified, it was real treat to revisit them with Peter. He had an analyst’s mind and was not above self-criticism. It is incredibly fortunate, at this sad time, that Peter was able to finish his book before his condition worsened.
I feel myself incredibly privileged that I had five years to know Peter Rodman. His loss strikes deep.
Michael Rubin is a member of MESH.
I first saw Peter Rodman in action in 1992, shortly after my arrival in Washington, at a foreign policy debate with Madeleine Albright during the Bush-Clinton campaign. Peter’s approach that night was representative of his approach to Washington’s often-divisive foreign policy conversation: he treated his opponent with calm civility and dry, gentle wit; he had a firm grip on the history of U.S. foreign policy and of enduring U.S. interests; he was wary of grandiose ambitions and of clever solutions to complicated problems; and he kept hammering away at the big strategic questions that he thought needed emphasis.
In his brief time at Brookings, Peter quickly became an indispensable part of our policy discussions and administrative meetings alike. His humor was so dry you often didn’t know whether he was pulling your leg—it would become clear only later, when he winked at you in the elevator as he repeated his remark.
He and I spent some time debating the wisdom of democracy efforts in Egypt: Peter was very conscious of the strategic advantages of close U.S.-Egyptian relations, and of what might be at risk in case of political instability there. I had hopes of bringing him around to my view that liberal reform is crucial to stabilizing Egypt and sustaining U.S.-Arab strategic cooperation. He was also a frequent participant in Saban Center discussions of Israeli-Syrian negotiations and of strategic challenges from Iran. It’s hard to believe Peter won’t be back at his desk at Brookings; there are so many more conversations I wanted to have with him, and so much I would have learned.
Tamara Cofman Wittes is a member of MESH.
My last glimpse of Peter Rodman was in a sidewalk chat in front of Brookings, on a lovely spring afternoon in Washington, talking about our shared concern at the possible side effects of American policy on the newly coined state of Kosovo—worrying that the Administration’s push for recognition was setting up a principle of secession that might haunt us in the future. I learned of his death the day after my return from a summer visit to Kosovo, where some of the problems of a partially recognized state have become apparent.
As Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs throughout the war in Iraq and the struggle against Al Qaeda, Peter was a wise and challenging counsellor. He did not try to mask his annoyance when American policy wandered, as in our uncertainty about what to do with North Korea’s push to develop nuclear weapons. He made plain the difficulties of formulating policy in a fitful inter-agency process, and certainly knew the challenges of engaging with the Congress and its 535 secretaries of state. In every briefing to the Defense Policy Board, he was utterly frank when he thought there were no good options against a foreign foe. He was always thoughtful, rather than emphatic, and provided the skeptical voice that was so essential in a sensible policy process. His wife Veronique is in our thoughts, as she always was in his.
Ruth Wedgewood is professor of international law and diplomacy at the School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University.
Peter Rodman set an example of public service that touched people in ways that he may not have recognized. This would have been the case if he had simply wielded his formidable knowledge and deployed his extremely sound diplomatic instincts. But in addition, he extended every encouragement to the open exchange of opinions and arguments, regardless of his interlocutors’ rank or station. After encountering him at the Pentagon and being awed by his sagacity, I happened to be at a Congressional hearing with him in 2006. During a break after our testimony, he took the time to engage me on ideas even though VIPs and reporters were clamoring for his attention, and I was just a young, green student of defense strategy. I will never forget how grateful I was to hear from him or the way he combined a seriousness of purpose with a gentleness of spirit. As the other tributes to him attest, this was the sort of thing that he did all the time.
Jacqueline Newmyer is a member of MESH.
Like Michael Rubin, I too had the privilege to work closely with Peter Rodman at the Pentagon. Peter was a remarkable individual, with a unique combination of insight, experience, humility, and humor. It was a pleasure to work with him in so many ways.
OSD was a real pressure cooker, yet through it all, Peter maintained composure and was consistently kind to his colleagues and underlings. (He really stood out in this regard.) Clearly, he was beloved by the OSD desk officers. But his Military Assistants (MAs)—typically two Navy Captains—loved him as well. In other front offices, the MAs kept large supplies of Maalox; a Colonel in another office even had a heart attack on duty. Not so in Peter’s office.
Moreover, Peter was a great writer who always improved and sharpened policy memos. With Peter, there was always value-added. From what I could tell, he lacked ego in policy matters. He was totally focused on mission, and didn’t take credit for other people’s work. Peter tried to bring people up. He pushed to get people into the meetings they needed to be in—regardless of protocol.
Peter was as tough as anyone in the Administration on the issues. Yet because of how he interacted with others, he didn’t seem to engender the level of hostility that other Pentagon officials did—either within or outside of the Administration. I could be wrong about this, but it seems to me that after Secretary Rumsfeld made his infamous 2003 comment about “old Europe,” Peter may have been one of the few Pentagon politicals still invited to French embassy receptions.
So Peter was a kind, decent, and honorable guy. But he was also a great analyst. And his decades of government service also provided him a broad range of anecdotes and stories from which to draw. Peter was encyclopedic. He was also very funny.
For example, I remember discussing with Peter the oft-voiced concern that if the international (Hariri) tribunal weakened or removed President Asad, that Syria—under a new president—might become even more militant. In his typically understated, sardonic tone, Peter cited U.S. Ambassador to the USSR (1941-1946) Averell Harriman, who famously said: “Stalin I can deal with. It’s the hardliners in the Kremlin who concern me.”
I could go on for pages about all of Peter’s great qualities—and I only knew him for six years or so. And I’m sure that everyone who worked with or for him would come up with a similar accounting. To me, Peter was a mentor and a model of government service and scholarship. He was also by all accounts an extremely proud and dedicated family man.
He’s going to be sorely missed.
David Schenker is a member of MESH.
Peter Rodman was a very kind person in a way that one cannot easily appreciate without having had contact with the many Washington types who flaunt their importance and only seek their own narrow personal interest. He did not change from being open and modest. He always showed the highest moral and intellectual character. No one could possibly have met him without liking and respecting him. How much better the world would be with more people like him. How bereft it is to be robbed of such a fine person.
Barry Rubin is a member of MESH.
We all have experienced relationships in which political and policy differences preclude even cordial personal relations. Not with Peter Rodman. I always found him open to honest exchange and friendship. We traveled together to the Middle East back during the 2000 presidential campaign on a bipartisan fact-finding delegation, and had the opportunity to talk and share experiences in ways that I still value.
I last saw Peter in April at a conference at Tufts-Fletcher School on how to make the State Department Policy Planning Staff more effective. Peter was among a number of former S/P Directors participating. With him was his Dad. That struck me as just great.
Condolences to his family.
Bruce Jentleson is a member of MESH.
I first met Peter Rodman 20 years ago. It was quite by accident as I accidentally spilled my drink on him at some affair whose purpose slips my mind. What struck me at the time was that he was more apologetic than I was—a sign that he understood my embarrassment even more than I did.
I next met Peter in February 2001. I was a member of the Defense Transition Team for Don Rumsfeld. Peter came in to interview for two jobs, one being the Assistant Secretary of Defense ISA. I spent over two hours with him in the interview. What impressed me then was that, while I did not agree with everything he was saying, he could and did clearly articulate his reasoning for each of his statements. Moreover, as he explained to me, his thoughts were not merely created by a consensus of thinking, but from the collective judgments of many people of many different views—many views which were polar opposites of his personal views. For me, there was no doubt he should be a member of the Defense Team.
During my time in the Pentagon I had numerous occasions to meet with Peter. Sometimes I went on my own to get his pulse on an issue and sometimes I went as an emissary for other officials. I was also with Peter a number of times when he briefed Secretary Rumsfeld, Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz and Under Secretary Feith. Again and again his argument was brilliant in its perfection.
Peter never avoided talking truth to power. He did not always succeed, but he tried.
I will miss him. My prayers are with Peter and his family.
Jaymie Durnan was Special Assistant to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz.
I have known Peter Rodman for so many years that I cannot remember when I met him. Peter and I were in email contact just last week (I asked him to write something for the next issue of The American Interest) and he was reluctant to do it because he wanted to first finish the book he was writing since leaving government. When we had lunched a few weeks earlier at the Cosmos Club he told me about his illness, but said he was feeling okay and getting better. When I saw his wife Veronique just about two weeks ago, I asked after Peter and she said everything seemed to be going well. So I am totally shocked by his death, and deeply saddened.
We worked together most closely in 2000-01 on the Hart-Rudman Commission. I was the chief writer of the three reports and Peter was the study group director for the second, strategy phase of the project. His work was superb, as it had been in government before and after: thoughtful, shrewd and lucid. Peter was an excellent writer, an indefatigable worker, and possessed of a wit so dry it could cut glass. I can barely believe he’s gone.
Adam Garfinkle is a member of MESH.
While others knew Peter Rodman in government, I had the pleasure of knowing him principally in the “think-tank” era of his career, first at the Nixon Center and then, more recently, at Brookings. All the accolades are true—he was unfailingly polite, resplendent in his well-cut suits and color-contrast shirts, and armed with a wit as dry and piercing as midday in the Sahara. Hosting me over lunch at the Cosmos Club, I recall him joking about bringing down the median age several decades—and he was already in his seventh.
For as long as I knew him, Peter was a happy warrior in the battle of ideas over foreign policy in Washington. In this battle, Peter always came back to first principles—he had clarity of vision about the national interest, about the importance of standing with allies, about the need to stand up to the nefariousness of our adversaries. He was firmly in the “realist” camp but, on matters of the Middle East, he consistently stood apart from those realists who saw America’s relations with Israel as an albatross and instead celebrated the alliance as a powerful asset in a region where America had few allies.
Peter was, from the start, a friend of The Washington Institute for Near East Pollicy, which I direct. Every four years (when he wasn’t in government), Peter served as a member of our Presidential Study Groups, always injecting sound and sage advice into our deliberations. I recall that he traveled with a delegation from the Institute to Egypt and Israel in 1996. He was a joy to be with overseas as well as in Washington.
Peter’s name is on almost every bipartisan study we undertook at the Institute over the past 20 years. His contribution enriched our recommendations and his participation gave merit to our findings.
Peter’s passing is a great loss. On behalf of all my colleagues, I send our deepest condolences to Peter’s family.
Robert Satloff is a member of MESH.
I first met Peter Rodman about ten years ago, when he visited Princeton for a small dinner with students. I knew about his extraordinary career, of course, and expected someone whose ego matched his accomplishments. Like so many others, I was surprised and delighted to discover that Peter was the complete opposite of the stereotypical successful Washingtonian. He was modest to a fault, without pretension, learned, open-minded, honest and independent in his thinking, genuinely patriotic and, above all, unfailingly honorable and decent. He was a good man and I feel fortunate to have known him. Like so many others, I mourn the loss to his family and friends, and to our country.
Aaron Friedberg is professor of politics and international affairs at Princeton University.
I last enjoyed Peter Rodman‘s company over lunch a few months back at his beloved Cosmos Club, a place where, he said, he always felt younger. (All he had to do was look at the other members, he’d quipped.)
I did not know him as well as many here did but I knew him intensely. During the early days of the Iraq war and often afterwards we would frequently cross paths (and occasionally swords). Despite the fact that we didn’t always agree on every point, he was always gracious and, importantly, he listened. He seldom steam-rolled people, hoping instead that logic and sound argumentation would carry the day. (They didn’t always.) Peter was learned; his arguments were crisp and clear; and he had forgotten more than I will ever know about how the interagency process works (and doesn’t). And yet Peter was never dismissive or arrogant—two temptations seldom avoided in Washington. I will miss his advice, his thoughtfulness and his sense of humor. I feel the ache of loss that comes from knowing I will not be able to get to know him better. My prayers and my family’s are with Peter’s.
J. Scott Carpenter is a member of MESH.
I met Peter Rodman in the spring of 1992. After finishing my term as Washington correspondent, I moved to the Foreign Policy Institute of Johns Hopkins (SAIS), where he was my neighbor on the 7th floor of the Rome Building. He was my colleague but actually my professor. He was smart, decent, and kind to brief a Japanese journalist about what was happening in the world from his viewpoint. The last occasion I met him was at Brookings in March 2008, when he talked about the book he was writing. I mourn the loss to his family and friends, and to U.S.-Japan relations.
Hisayoshi Ina is foreign policy columnist at the Nikkei newspapers based in Tokyo.
When I think of Peter Rodman, I don’t think of any particular defining episode or anecdote. My thoughts are cumulative, my impressions are of the man in full. A genuine public servant in a world where people increasingly scramble for private gains. A self-effacing man in a culture given to celebrity and self-promotion. Seeing him in Washington or Baghdad, you saw the man as he is: modest, devoted, inquisitive. We need more people like him, but we don’t have them. In and out of high government assignments, he never changed in demeanor and manners. Joseph Conrad memorably wrote of the truth that every man’s death takes out of the universe. Peter takes with him a big, quiet truth, of a good and decent American life.
Fouad Ajami is professor and director of Middle East studies at the School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University.
I commend both David Schenker and Michael Rubin for their insightful and warm-hearted remembrances of Peter Rodman (here and here). They have expressed (better than I could) the experience of working side-by-side with Peter during one of the most trying times in recent national history. I served along with David and Michael under Peter as the Afghanistan-Pakistan Country Director in OSD Policy between 1999-2004. I recall Peter’s calm and steadying influence in the hectic days immediately after the 9/11 attacks. In that period of loss and rage, his was a voice of moderation and reasoned judgement. He held us together and kept us focused on the true goals of national service: protection of the the American people and our way of life.
In his lifetime, the scope of his contributions to the national security was enormous, spanning continents and eras. I was proud to have served with him—worked with him and for him—through my final days at OSD. Now, with his passing, I am grateful to have known him as a leader, a mentor, and a friend. He leaves a wonderful legacy. My thoughts and prayers are with his family, his friends, and his memory.
I took Peter Rodman to Hanoi, Vietnam, during the summer of 2005. It was a trip that he had longed to do, but the Vietnamese were not prepared in 2004 to agree to host the visit, largely because of reasons that were extraneous to the notion of an ASD-level trip itself. I recall Mr. Rodman’s frustration, and his view of what he could accomplish. He remained convinced that dividends could be derived by such a visit, and by early 2005 the Vietnamese Defense Ministry had warmed to the idea. We accomplished the visit in the summer of 2005, during the hottest, most humid, most disagreeable time of the year.
Mr. Rodman was unflappable. His shirt collar never showed the wear and tear of the scorching Hanoi sun, the overwhelming dust and grim, and other physical realities of Hanoi. His visit was a truly cerebral event. He managed to take normally reticent Vietnamese Foreign and Defense Ministry interlocutors and turn them into voluble partners yearning to exchange strategic viewpoints. He was a masterful speaker, and managed to produce coherent presentations in multiple back-to-back sessions with the Defense Ministry, senior Foreign Ministry representatives, officials from the National Defense College, and students and faculty representing the Foreign Ministry’s Institute for International Relations.
He spoke eloquently, in such quotable sentences, and brought order and coherence to wide-ranging discussions. He exerted great command over his audiences during this trip. He evoked powerful images and recollections of the last days of the Paris Peace negotiations in discussions with Vietnamese senior officials and young Foreign Affairs trainees. He had this way of clasping his hands in front of him, and leaning into a microphone that struck me as an act of intimacy with his audience. He took a posture in answering queries from the audience that suggested real, deliberate schooling in both appearance and rhetoric; it struck me that he approached the microphone with the same enthusiasm, confidence and civility whether he was addressing elected officials on the Hill or taking a podium in a fairly fundamental Vietnamese Foreign Ministry teaching facility, run down by age, probably constructed by Soviet-trained builders in the 1960s.
I look over my notes from the June 2005 visit and see that he later reported he was received with “surprising warmth” in Hanoi by senior Defense, Foreign Ministry, and Public Security officials, including then Defense Minister Pham Van Tra, He drew the conclusion, at the end of his trip, that our respective perceptions of regional security were “clearly converging,” and the Vietnamese defense establishment was “eager to do more in the bilateral defense relationship. He noted that there were many “subtle indications” that the Vietnamese had China on their minds. In addition, a Deputy Foreign Minister told of the perception in the region that “America is back” in Asia—engaged and playing a positive role. Mr. Rodman was gratified that he could confirm this, and pleased that the Vietnamese saw the same personal symmetry in a career arc that led him to play a role in negotiating peace, normalizing relations with China, and nudging normalization of defense relations with Vietnam forward.
Coincidentally, on August 4, 2008, the day I learned that Mr. Rodman has passed away, I was scheduled to meet with Dr. Hoang Anh Tuan, the Vietnamese Embassy’s Political Counselor for Congressional Affairs. Dr. Tuan was the Director of the Foreign Ministry’s Institute for International Relations in 2005, and was Mr. Rodman’s host. He recalled the warmth, the frankness, and the true seminar-like quality of Mr. Rodman’s interaction with the Institute’s diplomats in training.
Mr. Rodman gave renewed relevance to the phrase most fitting as recognition of the impression he made as ASD/ISA: He was a gentleman and a scholar.
Lewis Stern is Director for Southeast Asia, Office of the Secretary of Defense.
It’s touching to read these very appropriate tributes to Peter Rodman‘s gentle brilliance. Peter was a devoted and patriotic American and even though I was to the left of the left in the days we shared a group house in the mid-70s when he worked at the Ford White House, with and for Henry Kissinger, I liked him enormously.
I hope it will not be out of place to tell you that he was a hilarious and somewhat bumbling member of our extended family. We shared household chores by rotating them through the group. When it was someone’s “week” he/she was responsible for buying the food, and for cooking one meal for the entire house. Our cooking abilities varied, and Peter was noted for the intensity with which he approached his responsibilities. He was by no means the worst cook in the house, either.
We were a motley group: two low-level government bureaucrats, one grad student, one public defender, one arty advertising type, and Peter. We always wondered why he would want to live with us, or perhaps more aptly, why he was allowed to. I don’t think one of us would have passed even the lowest-level security clearance. I suspect Peter was able to reassure Kissinger, Shultz and the White House that we were all clueless and no threat to the civilized world, no matter how disreputable our political views. He was, of course, right—he knew a security threat when he saw one.
He left for work early each morning, returning late in the evening, working Saturdays, but sleeping as late as possible on Sundays, listening to his beloved opera records for hours. He was remarkably discreet about his work; I don’t remember his ever saying anything that could have been construed then or now as a security breach.
His dry sense of humor went over our heads most of the time, and he was delighted when we’d get his intricate jokes. We all despised Nixon, but it didn’t faze him in the least. He, and we, set that aside because he was such a wonderful, gentle human being and because one could not help but respect him and his convictions because of his deep sincerity.
I lost touch with him over the years, and my left-wing politics moderated somewhat, but I remain a staunch Democrat. Nonetheless, I was pleased to see his return to government in the early Bush II years. It was comforting to know that he was in government: it gave me a confidence that my country’s best interests were being looked after.
He’s died too young. My thoughts and prayers go to Veronique and his children during this very sad time. They deserved more time together.
I too worked in the Pentagon with Peter Rodman a few years ago and I found him a humble, wise foreign policy veteran with an extremely knowledgeable and inquisitive mind.
I first met Peter in 2000 at a think tank talk, and he was kind enough to take an interest in me and my doctoral studies at Harvard. After he entered DOD as Assistant Secretary, he sought to help me get a position at the Pentagon. While I did not have extensive contact with him at DOD, the contact I did have always involved him asking very pointed relevant questions in a humble fashion. His death is shocking.
May Peter rest in peace and his family be comforted.
Michael Makovsky is foreign policy director of the Bipartisan Policy Center, and a former special assistant in the Office of Secretary of Defense.
I have known Peter Rodman since the mid-90s. We worked closely when he was Assistant Secretary of Defense. At the time, I was DG, North America of the Japanese Foreign Ministry. As usual, there were enough complicated issues, but he was always calm, thoughtful and very friendly. In short, he was a great counterpart. I came back only two months ago to Washington as ambassador and was looking forward to working with him.
His passing away is a great loss for myself as well as to the friendship between our two countries. May he rest peacefully in heaven.
Ichiro Fujisaki is ambassador of Japan to the United States.
I went to summer camp with Peter Rodman from 1958 through 1964, when we counselors sat one August night and listened, aghast, to Barry Goldwater’s acceptance speech—with its note of welcome to “extremism in the defense of liberty.” I’m fairly sure Peter voted for LBJ that fall. I know he admired fellow Bostonian JFK and was deeply affected by his death.
Even as a young teenager Peter was known and admired for his intellect, his wit, and his all-around niceness. He worried at times about the latter, so it’s good to read in these tributes that kindness was a trait that he retained ’til the end. We were a letter-writing generation, and his letters were eagerly anticipated for their cleverness, humor, and witty graphics. We were in touch periodically through our college years and while he worked on the Rockefeller campaign with Dr. Kissinger. Just last fall we exchanged greetings through a mutual camp friend—and I so much regret that feelings about our political differences led me to defer following up with more direct contact.
Did I mention that at 17 he was a magnificent King in our camp performance of The King and I? I can still see him pacing the stage, while singing/speaking “‘Tis a Puzzlement.” He was at his most charismatic.
Peter Rodman was a brilliant and engaging fellow who served as a mentor to many in the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD). He could write memos like no other. In a building like the Pentagon, where one’s writings are often limited in verbiage with sufficient “white space,” Peter always found a penetrating and articulate way to convey his thoughts. As Levant Director in OSD, it was my great honor to bring Peter to Lebanon—a place he had been fascinated by—in 2006. Our trip, the first visit by a senior-level civilian defense official in many years, was intense. Yet I was awed that Peter was just as giddy with excitement as I was—unlike other senior officials, he indulged in the incredibility of this experience. Even when he became sick, Peter enthusiastically emailed me about Levant issues. He would not be slowed down. He will be sorely missed.
Mara Karlin serves as Special Assistant to the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy.
Click here for a photo of Peter Rodman and Lebanese prime minister Fouad Siniora, Beirut, November 2006. —MESH Admin
I didn’t know Peter Rodman very well, but I feel a certain kinship with him. We attended the same high school in Boston, The Roxbury Latin School, though he graduated some three and half decades before me. When I arrived in Washington in 2005 as a naive twenty-something with a passion for foreign policy, I immediately looked Peter up and emailed him, despite having only a vague idea of his eminent background and senior position in the Pentagon. I received a personal reply the following day and found myself sitting in his office the next week. After I expressed my interest in national security affairs, I know he went out of his way to find me an internship in the Pentagon.
As a DOD intern working in the Middle East office, I had a few opportunities to interact directly with Peter. I remember a kind, pensive man; someone who listened and thought before he spoke in meetings. I remember him going out of his way to thank me, quite unnecessarily, for a briefing book I had prepared for one of his many trips. I remember getting memos and drafts of speeches and letters back down the “chain” with his incisive comments that made me smile, so impressed was I by his clarity, intelligence, and turn of phrase. Most of all, I remember “escorting” him to a meeting and literally running down the long halls of the Pentagon and up many flights of stairs to keep up with him—a man 35 years my senior. The meeting was with a group of students, like me, interested in U.S. foreign policy. He spent over two hours (ninety minutes more than allotted for the session) chatting with the students and dispensing his wealth of accumulated wisdom in anecdotal nuggets.
From all that I hear and the little that I know of Peter Rodman, he was a wise and good man. I am saddened by his death, and feel grateful to have crossed his path, if only for a short while.
Who will ever forget Peter Rodman? Not I, for he was the only one who retained a fully intellectual disposition with an affinity for government office, and improbably combined both with unaffected human warmth.
Edward Luttwak is a senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
MESH has received the following email:
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2008 11:19:44 -0400
From: Gail Chalef ( gchalef at brookings.edu)
Subject: Peter Rodman Funeral Plans
Thank you again for your calls and e-mails regarding Peter Rodman’s death. His wife, Veronique, and their two children are most appreciative of the expressions of sympathy and notes of appreciation that they have received from all of Peter’s friends and colleagues.
For those who might be able to attend, Peter’s funeral will be on Monday, August 11 in Boston, Massachusetts at 1:30 pm. The location of the funeral is:
Temple Israel
477 Longwood Avenue
Boston, Mass.
The burial will take place at the Sharon Memorial Park on Dedham Street in Sharon, Mass. (about a half hour drive from the Temple). Directions to the cemetery will be provided at the funeral service.
Following the burial, a reception will be held at the Harvard Club of Boston (374 Commonwealth Avenue, Boston, MA).
If you are unable to travel to Boston on Monday, a memorial service will be held in Washington in mid-September. We will provide details regarding the Washington service as soon as we have them.
As A/S for Education and Cultural Affairs and Acting U/S for Public Diplomacy under Secretary Powell, I had many meetings which included Peter Rodman. He used few words when it was obvious that copious verbal paragraphs were required, he applied wit and humor when others were still struggling with concepts, and he was kind in his listening and his actions. Years ago, in Brooklyn, I would hear my father describe someone (and it was a rare occasion) with the highest praise in just three words. They apply now: a real mensch.
Patricia Harrison is president and CEO of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.