The Foreign Service Journal, January 2008

with? Definitely not. Dangerous? Sometimes. But we all face danger at times in the Foreign Service. Like many FS members, I have war and danger stories — not just from Iraq. If there are people out there who expected to serve in Paris most of their careers, they need to change careers. Let’s show our commitment and discipline. We need our best officers out here. We don’t need people who are not committed, who are not here for the right reasons. AFSA needs to represent this view, the view of so many other great officers in the Foreign Service. Paul Folmsbee FSO PRT Baghdad Choose Iraq I volunteered to be the first leader of the first PRT in Iraq. I consider it an honor to have served in Mosul alongside our military colleagues. A number of talented Foreign Service officers served on my team; they were volunteers who did an outstanding job under difficult conditions. I’m against directed assignments to Iraq because, in my opinion, draft- ees are less likely to perform well. Rather, I urge all FSOs to volunteer for duty in Iraq, regardless of their feelings about the origin of the conflict or the way it’s being carried out. Take the risk willingly, and make the effort wholeheartedly. This is, after all, the most important Ameri- can foreign policy challenge of our time — and I hope that capable, dedicated Foreign Service officers will take it on. Cameron Munter FSO Embassy Belgrade Contempt from Management I would like to register my dismay at the way the State Department’s leadership announced the directed assignment policy for Iraq staffing. From beginning to end, I felt we were terribly ill-served by our leader- ship. Some examples: allowing the policy to be announced first through a press leak; calling a catastrophically poorly planned town hall meeting, in which the director general treated justifiably concerned personnel like crybabies; letting participants’ candid, off-the-record comments air on TV and radio; and reminding FSOs that management reserved for itself the right to go to directed assignments for non-Iraq positions after we had step- ped up and met management’s vora- cious appetite for officers in Iraq. Yes, thank you, we know you have the right to send us where you want. But why do you have to shove this in our faces again, immediately after we have gone through such a wrenching period? I understand that the role of the department and its personnel is to fulfill the policy objectives of the administration. That is not the issue. Rather, the issue is how department management goes about working with us to meet department goals. Instead of showing understanding for the very difficult position directed assignments put many of us in — choosing be- tween families, careers and personal safety — our leadership showed us contempt. Personally, I am disgusted. Woodward Clark Price FSO Embassy Athens Loyalty Goes Both Ways With the Iraq assignment issue temporarily resolved, it’s time for all concerned to recognize that no other agency can substitute for the State Department. A strong and effective U.S. involvement overseas is indistin- guishable from a strong and effective Department of State. To have that kind of department, “the troops” must have confidence that their leaders are fighting on their behalf for things that matter to them and their families, not just enforcing the needs of “the system.” As the town hall meeting showed, many FS staff justifiably lack that confidence. To restore it, department management must tackle several issues now: Staffing. The shameful neglect that has allowed an undersized For- eign Service to fall more than 2,000 members below requirements must be corrected. That shortage was a major factor in the Iraq assignments problem; allowing outsiders to blame our members for it was indefensible. Comparability Pay. Eliminating the ridiculous Washington vs. over- seas pay gap is essential to give department leaders the moral author- ity to demand ever more overseas time. Family-Friendliness. The Foreign Service is a corps of families, not diplomatic Janissaries. Repairing the recent losses in family-friendliness is not a frill; it’s a necessity. Force Protection. Defending the FS against the recent unjust attacks was primarily management’s job, not AFSA’s. That duty was generally shirked; it must not be in the future. These issues and others (such as fairness in assignments) are clear. It’s time for management’s “loyalty down” on such matters to match the “loyalty up” that it requires, and that the Foreign Service has always shown. George Colvin FSO Embassy Apia Support Goes Both Ways I support directed assignments. We owe it to whatever administration we serve to provide our most suitable people to carry out their policies. We receive a larger pension and an earlier retirement than our Civil Service 16 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / J A N U A R Y 2 0 0 8 L E T T E R S