In the next few days, media headlines will probably use National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice’s last name and the term “pressure cooker” more than a few times.

But the administration’s decision to give into bipartisan demands and let Rice testify publicly in front of the Sept. 11 commission was the right thing to do, no matter the political fallout.

Not only was it right, but it is certainly the most credible response the administration can make in face of the recent blistering attacks by its former counterterrorism adviser, Richard Clarke, who has alleged, among other things, that Bush desperately wanted him to make a link between Sept. 11 and Iraq, and that Rice, during a briefing early in 2001, did not appear to even have heard of al-Qaida.

Now Clarke isn’t untouchable with his motives —some have bitterly complained of how he timed the release of his book with his appearance before the Sept. 11 commission.

But at least he has been confident enough to go under oath and even request his private testimony and e-mails during his term be declassified.

Rice, before Tuesday, looked in comparison like a shady bureaucrat with plenty of embarrassing secrets to hide.

It’s not as if publicly testifying is a big step for Rice. During the past week, she has made the rounds on the television circuit, calling Clarke’s accusations “scurrilous” and “arrogance at its extreme.” We assume she has been speaking truthfully without needing to place her hand on a Bible.

So her public appearance before the commission is in some ways only a formality. But it still has the symbolic importance of showing the administration is sincere in wanting to illuminate what really happened in regards to Sept. 11.

Nor would Rice be the first in her position to testify in front of Congress; Sandy Berger, the national security adviser for former President Clinton, took an oath in 1997 and testified about Clinton’s fund-raising practices before a Senate committee.

It goes without saying that Sept. 11 is a topic of far more gravity.

The Bush administration worries this will set a precedent of coercing cabinet members into testifying against their commander-in-chief.

However, Sept. 11 is unique enough that an exception is necessary.

If Rice’s testimony helps fulfill the ultimate goal of this commission—to find out what went wrong before Sept. 11 — it will remain unique, rather than be the first in a line of terrorist attacks that our nation could have prevented.