The Foreign Service Journal, February 2006

Restructuring State … and USAID? As part of her transformational diplomacy initiative, Rice has also launched an ambitious restructuring of bureaus aimed at better countering the terrorist threat. Last year, with Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair- man Richard Lugar, R-Ind., standing at her side, she announced a plan to merge the Arms Control and Inter- national Security Affairs bureaus (known collectively as “T”) to create a new Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation. The revamped bureau is to focus exclusively on the threat posed by ter- rorists seeking weapons of mass destruction. Taking per- sonnel freed up by that merger, Rice then moved to strengthen the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs and to expand the Bureau of Verification, Compliance and Implementation. The reorganization has angered many of the affected employees, who have expressed to AFSA strong concerns over the lack of transparency in the naming of acting office directors and deputies; the possible downgrading or elimi- nation of Foreign Service-designated positions; and indica- tions that political considerations (e.g., the perception of loyalty to a particular ideological point of view) are deter- mining how individual employees fare in the reorganiza- tion. On their behalf, AFSA has requested from State management a written description of the reorganization plan; a suspension of personnel decisions pending the asso- ciation’s opportunity to consult and/or negotiate them; and the appointment of an independent panel to review reor- ganization decisions with regard to EEO concerns and prohibited personnel practices. In keeping with her theme of transformational diplo- macy, Rice also changed the title of the under secretary of State for global affairs to the under secretary of State for democracy and global affairs, and removed from its oversight the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement. Late last year, Rice announced plans to reassign responsibility for diplomatic relations with five countries that are key to the war on terrorism in Central Asia — Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan — from the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs to a renamed Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs (formerly the Bureau of South Asian Affairs). A department notice declares that “the new bureau will support a united regional strategy to advance democracy and stability.” Meanwhile, the administration has continued its efforts to revamp foreign aid by strengthening the role of the Millennium Challenge Corporation, which aims to further development overseas by directing dollars only to those countries that have demonstrated a commitment to free-market econo- mics and democracy. Rice has been tight-lipped, though, about what the MCC means for the future of the U.S. Agency for International Development. In December and again in early January, the Financial Times reported that Rice and State’s Director for Policy Planning Stephen Krasner were planning to announce early in 2006 a major reorganization of foreign assistance programs that could involve merging State and USAID, and creating a second Deputy Secretary of State slot to oversee aid and develop- ment programs administered by both agencies. Fueling speculation, USAID Administrator Andrew Natsios — well regarded among the rank and file — recently announced a mid-January departure to accept a professor- ship at Georgetown University. Fore denies that there are any plans for a merger of the two agencies. “We have been talking about ways we can better collaborate,” Fore says, adding that her goal is to further unify State and USAID’s planning and budgeting processes, which are partially joined now. Last fall saw the launch of a new Joint State-USAID Financial Management System, a long-term project that the department hopes will boost rightsizing efforts by allowing the department to pull out financial sup- port personnel from critical danger posts to regional centers or to Washington. The system will also help managers to access financial information they need to make allocation decisions. “We have been operating without it for many years,” says Fore. “We are just at the beginning of a new era for financial management.” Fore sees her own management agenda and Rice’s vision of transformational diplomacy as intertwined. Rice, she says, “means to make a genuine difference in how we F O C U S F E B R U A R Y 2 0 0 6 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 25 Some of Rice’s appointments have collectively fed the notion that Rice is disinterested in the views of the rank-and-file.