The Foreign Service Journal, January-February 2017

10 JANUARY-FEBRUARY 2017 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL LETTERS Patience First For the first time since retiring I’m glad I’m retired. The reason is Donald Trump. If the president-elect acts on his campaign rhetoric and scuttles trade deals, ignores Article 5 of the NATO charter, begins deporting Hispanics by the millions, encourages countries to acquire nuclear weapons and condones territorial aggressions, then I’m happy to be here on Cape Cod rather than in one of our embassies or consulates. If implemented, these positions will have no justification, no defense. They are wrong. Since the Truman adminis- tration, practitioners of American foreign policy from both major parties have worked to build a structure of defensive alliances and trade agreements that ensures our safety and prosperity. Although my contemporaries and I— unlike Dean Acheson—were not present at its creation, we took seriously the legacy of American internationalism, our security commitments and the promo- tion of democracy, human rights and individual freedoms. We were confident in these policies, proud of the values they expressed and comfortable in advo- cating them. Despite some egregious failures, which President-Elect Trump has glee- fully noted, we have largely succeeded. The United States and the world are bet- ter off as a result of our efforts. I therefore must ask: Does Mr. Trump really want to turn seven decades of effective American diplomacy on its head? If so, he will undermine our safety and prosperity and tarnish the image of the United States. But what if—as is often the case dur- ing an electoral campaign—his words were just so much fodder for the voter, no more sincere than Don Juan’s profes- sions of true love? After all, the office of the president does have a tendency to sober a man. It makes him realize that his decisions will have consequences, and that history will sit in judgment of his actions. It does appear, at least on a few issues, that the president-elect has reconsidered some of his stated positions and hedged a bit on his more provocative promises. Is this cause for hope, or wishful think- ing? I imagine that many members of the Foreign Service and their Civil Service colleagues are nervously asking them- selves this very question. We are a pro- fessional Foreign Service, committed to serving the nation and supporting each administration’s policies, no matter the party in power or our personal prefer- ences. Most of us, I would think, have at one time or another advocated for a policy we found mistaken, misguided or myopic. The State Department could not function otherwise. For those reasons I think that we owe the Trump administration sufficient time to develop and deploy their foreign policies. If we were to act precipitously, if we failed to give the president-elect the same consideration that we have given his predecessors, we would betray our pledge to serve the nation irrespective of partisan politics. We would weaken America. But this patience and, if it comes to it, this willingness to support policies with which we personally disagree must have its limits. During the conflict in Vietnam, I have been told, many officers resigned in protest. Some resigned during the Balkan crisis of the 1990s and the Second Persian Gulf War. There comes a time when conscience and principle, both subjective tests, make continuing to serve personally dis- tasteful. Then, we confront the dilemma: Do I resign, forsaking a career I cherish? Or do I continue to serve? If the latter, then we, as professional diplomats, owe the full measure of our energy and intel- lect to the enterprise. Perhaps it will never get to that point. But if it does, I’m glad I’m retired. Robert Callahan Ambassador, retired Centerville, Massachusetts The State of Writing I agree with Paul Poletes’ thoughtful piece on the state of State writing (“Get- ting Beyond Bureaucratese—Why Writ- ing Like Robots Damages U.S. Interests,” Speaking Out, November 2016 FSJ ). As a long- time newspaper reporter who joined the Foreign Service in 2011, I was surprised to find State writ- ing so cumber- some. During my first tour, while serving as a consular officer, I found my writing skills to be in demand to draft articles and edit colleagues’ EERs to make them clearer. To use Poletes’ words “wordiness, empty jargon, wishy-washy prose and a near total lack of human touch” do not make us sound smarter. “Bureaucratese” confuses the reader and leads to ineffec- tive communication of policy. In writing, less is more. Clear is beau- tiful. We owe simpler, more effective writ- ing to our colleagues and ourselves. n Sarah Talalay FSO Arlington, Virginia