The Foreign Service Journal, January 2011

J A N U A R Y 2 0 1 1 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 43 strikingly similar to “transformational diplomacy,” at least in terms of its as- pirations, Copeland argues that the new approach must do more than re- tool outdated national security pos- tures to meet new threats. It must also look at the sources and drivers of those threats and focus on the deeply rooted ills, not the symptoms. As he explains, the pace of global- ization is accelerating the fragmenta- tion of the international system into four different “worlds”: the politically and economically advantaged; the fragile and partially developed; the completely dependent; and the en- tirely excluded. Within this framework, Copeland’s analysis leads to the inescapable con- clusion that “persistent insecurity” is the only thing these globally interde- pendent worlds have in common. What is missing, alas, is any intercon- necting fabric of peacebuilding to re- verse or minimize the process of fragmentation. Copeland acknowledges that a complete makeover of our profession may not be feasible, particularly given the institutional resistance to such sweeping change. But he is absolutely right that 21st-century diplomats can- not escape the need to operate more effectively in a world dominated by news and information on demand. Edward Salazar is a retired Foreign Service officer whose last assignment was as senior adviser in the Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization. Now an interna- tional affairs consultant, he has been working part-time at the Foreign Serv- ice Institute to prepare the Intera- gency Policy Seminar. B O O K S