The Foreign Service Journal, October 2011

10 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / O C T O B E R 2 0 1 1 L E T T E R S as setting training requirements before promotion to senior rank, relying on a training float of 15 percent and getting selection boards to give more attention to promoting those in training. The Foreign Service has been trying to get such changes through Congress and various administrations for more than 50 years! A section of the report deals with the mid-level gap in today’s Foreign Service, a subject I addressed in my June Speaking Out column. AAD’s analysis suggests that the gap will last only five to seven years, presumably to be overcome by a series of recom- mended steps, notably (a) “limited ca- reer extensions to keep qualified officers for a few additional years, when their time in service would otherwise force retirement,” and (b) faster pro- motion of junior officers—perhaps as- sisted by a system of floating counselors to educate the beginners. It is certainly reasonable to mourn the inexperience of junior officers who are not performing as well as they might in challenging positions, at- tributing the situation to a shortage of more experienced, mid-career officers. But it then seems strange to recom- mend promoting those very same jun- ior officers even faster! In any case, it seems that in recent years, officers are being promoted faster than in the past anyway. Then there is the hopeful assump- tion that the mid-career gap will last just five to seven years. I wonder how this was calculated and how realistic it is, along with other recommendations that include personnel growth on a sus- tained basis over 13 years. When did the U.S. Congress—or for that matter any series of presidential administra- tions — ever carry out a 13-year plan dealing with anything, much less the impoverished Foreign Service? It seems more likely that the gap will per- sist. With that inmind, I believe the For- eign Service would be wiser to carry out plans that lie within its own control. First, extend the careers of mid-level and Senior Foreign Service officers who have not been promoted accord- ing to current time-in-class rules, and change the rules accordingly. Second, enforce appropriate in- structions to better train the selection boards, which are made up mainly of FSOs who ought to be persuadable (and educable). And finally, why not renew the old practice of allowing lim- ited mid-career entry beyond the nar- row limits that I gather are currently in place? The AAD report is a far-ranging prescription of what ought to be done. But isn’t it smarter to start with what the Foreign Service can do for itself? George B. Lambrakis FSO, retired London On the Green The July-August issue profile of Ambassador Roz Ridgway (“A Con- summate Negotiator”) called to mind her years as a first-tour FSO at Em- bassy Manila in the early 1960s. There she regularly outplayed diplomatic couriers, Marine security guards and other embassy golfers on local courses. Despite such treatment, I believe I can speak for most of us when I say we’re not surprised by Ambassador Ridgway’s stellar rise through the For- eign Service. What a good interview! Best wishes, Roz! Wayne Hoshal FSO, retired Grand Rapids, Minn. CHANGE OF ADDRESS Moving? Take AFSA With You! Change your address online at: www.afsa.org/comment.cfm To log in, use your AFSA membership number on the mailing label of your Foreign Service Journal . The number is on the top left corner of the label, right above your name. It may be 2 digits or up to 7 digits. The password is your last name. It is not case sensitive. Or Send change of address to: AFSA Membership Department 2101 E Street NW Washington, DC 20037