The Foreign Service Journal, January 2008

Those members of Congress who called members of the Foreign Ser- vice wimps and traitors should resign in shame. The world is not black and white; this is something the Foreign Service understands. Those who believe it is should not be put in charge of foreign policy, or the result will be a mess that takes decades and many American lives to clean up. Ralph Falzone FSO Embassy Hanoi Intimidation Instead of Leadership The Foreign Service is a risky calling. Extensive tours in violent and wartorn countries have left me, like many of my colleagues, as accustom- ed to gunfire and landmine explosions as to the clink of wineglasses at a reception. We voluntarily accept, and even seek out, such duty in our desire to serve our country. It was therefore startling to learn — and from the media on a Saturday morning, no less — that State Depart- ment management had decided to invoke directed assignments to Iraq. The following week brought statements, not just by ill-informed commentators but also by some sen- ior State officials, implicitly question- ing the suitability for service and the courage of those FSOs who were reluctant to serve in Iraq. At a time when leadership is essential, we got intimidation. Iraq is one of a myriad of chal- lenges to America’s security and pros- perity, and meeting those challenges will require department leadership in building and retaining a robust For- eign Service, for Iraq and elsewhere, for now and the future. The short- sighted invocation of contractual legalese needs to be set aside and replaced by vision and a commitment to the entire Foreign Service — its well-being, its capabilities and its morale. The Foreign Service has again stepped up to meet its responsi- bilities. It is time for State leadership to not only set realistic goals, but to support the entire team needed to achieve them. Alan J. Carlson FSO U.S. Mission Geneva No á la Carte Policy I understand the dissatisfaction of a number of my colleagues regarding the DG’s recent announcement of directed assignments to Iraq. The Secretary herself should have been at the town hall meeting. That said, I think we FSOs need to tuck in our collective chin and accept directed assignments without any further grumbling. The fact that there may be legitimate criticism of our Iraq policy as ill-conceived from the beginning, or that our continued presence there is unwanted (or at best grudgingly tolerated), does not matter. When we signed on the dotted line, we agreed to worldwide availability. We cannot eat á la carte from this administration’s (or any other admin- istration’s) policy menu. Service in Iraq, Afghanistan or any other post in a war zone is part of our job. Standing up and accepting directed assignments as the dedicat- ed professionals that we are is not only our duty, but the best argument against those who choose to remain ignorant and yet obstreperously criti- cal of our work. At the same time, the State Department owes it to those who it is sending into harm’s way to provide adequate training and support. There are financial issues involved in separating families, in addition to those important but less tangible personal ones that should also be aggressively addressed by the depart- ment. And frankly, now is the time for AFSA to go charging to the Hill, with full and vigorous support from the Secretary, to press Congress on the longstanding issue of overseas comparability pay and the legislation giving income tax breaks to those who serve in war zones. We will do our part, accepting the directed assignments and serving with dignity and professionalism in war zones to further U.S. policy goals. But let’s not waste this opportunity to impress upon the relevant decision- makers that they should give the Foreign Service appropriate consider- ation when it comes to the legitimate long-standing issues of locality pay and tax breaks. I hope AFSA and the department leadership will be assertive with re- gard to these responsibilities, now more than ever, as we FSOs accept our duty to serve where our nation calls us. David M. Birdsey FSO Embassy Kabul Where’s Service Discipline? I am puzzled by reports that the director general may have to resort to “drafting” officers for duty in Iraq on pain of dismissal. I was at one time a deputy member of the Board of Examiners and thought that every prospective member of the Foreign Service was required to take an oath “to defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic” as well as to serve in accordance with “the needs of the Service.” We are at war. Where is the Service discipline of the current generation of Foreign Service officers? Are they a bunch of wusses who joined the Service only for sight- seeing abroad at taxpayer expense? One of the more useful accom- plishments of past DGs was creation of the Foreign Affairs Reserve 22 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