Members of the Bush administration are not normally know for self-reflection, admitting mistakes, revisiting past decisions, etc. That may be changing as the administration's last days approach.

In an upcoming article in Foriegn Affairs magazine, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has penned an essay that reads like it is part legacy-shaping, part end-of-tenure review, and part memorandum to her succesor.

To be sure, Rice defends the basic tenets of hers and President Bush's foreign policy: the decision to invade Iraq, trying to democratize the Middle East, tough stances toward Iran and Syria.

But she also acknowledges flawed tactics and execution. Of Iraq, she writes "The cost of this war, in lives and treasure, for Americans and Iraqis, has been greater than we ever imagined. ... We have made mistakes. That is undeniable. The explosion to the surface of long-suppressed grievances has challenged fragile, young democratic institutions. But there is no other decent and peaceful way for the Iraqis to reconcile."

On Middle East democracy, Rice seems more willing to acknowledge the points of her skeptics, even as she argues that pushing Arab regimes to open up is the right policy.

Her biggest turn-about, however, is on "nation-building," using U.S. power and resources, including the U.S. military, to rebuild shattered societies.

Eight years ago, when she was foreign policy advisor to then-presidential candidate George W. Bush, Rice wrote an article in the same journal deploring President Clinton's propensity to send U.S. troops on peace-making missions in Somalia, Haiti and other hotspots.

"The president must remember that the military is a special instrument. It is lethal, and it is meant to be. It is not a civilian police force. It is not a political referee. And it is most certainly not designed to build a civilian society. Military force is best used to support clear political goals, whether limited, such as expelling Saddam from Kuwait, or comprehensive, such as demanding the unconditional surrender of Japan and Germany during World War II."

That was Rice then. This is Rice now, in the latest essay:  "In these pages in 2000, I decried the role of the United States, in particular the U.S. military, in nation building. In 2008, it is absolutely clear that we will be involved in nation building for years to come. But it should not be the U.S. military that has to do it. Nor should it be a mission that we take up only after states fail."