The Foreign Service Journal, March 2005

mats were able to be innovative in arranging work stoppages and slow- downs over a three-week period with- out losing salary. Several times a week, PAFSO put up picket lines early in the morning and then took them down and reported to work just late enough to disrupt the workday. The Making of a Canadian Diplomat American diplomats were instru- mental in our nation’s founding: think of Benjamin Franklin, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson in France during the Revolutionary War. More- over, many of our early presidents — Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, John Quincy Adams, Van Buren and Buchanan — were diplomats or served as Secretary of State. By contrast, Canadian diplomacy is a considerably more recent phenome- non, and only one Canadian foreign minister (Lester Pearson) has become prime minister. It has also been much more influenced by, and derived from, British tradition than the American system. Until the British North America Act of 1867, Canada was a British colony; and that act, while according the country domestic auton- omy, left foreign affairs in British hands. Thus, Canada and the United States dealt with each other primarily through the British Embassy in Washington. A Canadian agent dealing with immigration began operations in London in 1869; he reported to the Department of Agriculture in Ottawa. The first (part-time) commercial agents were not appointed until 1892, while the first full-time commercial agent was appointed to Australia (not the United States, interestingly) in 1894. By World War I, there were 26 full- or part-time Canadian agents in 16 countries. Quality was character- ized by its absence. One contempo- rary Canadian observer described them as “political and other derelicts … entirely unfitted by character or attainments for their position.” The first two Canadian representa- tives (known initially as “agents of the Canadian government in France” and, eventually, as “ministers plenipo- tentiary and envoys extraordinary”) sent to France each lasted more than a quarter-century. The first, appoint- ed in 1882, stayed 28 years; the sec- ond, 27. Each was a journalist, a member of the ruling Liberal Party and a former senator; each died in office. There was no question of Civil Service competition for the positions. Following World War I, the British accepted the principle that dominions could be represented by their own diplomats. There already were com- petitive exams for Canadian commer- cial agents (a university education was expected) and for immigration service officials (the prerequisite was equiva- lent to high school graduation but with four years of practical farming experience in Canada). For the diplo- matic service, however, standards were set so high (law degree, two years of postgraduate experience and bilinguality in French and English) that in 1925 only a single candidate was deemed qualified. Subsequent requirements were less elevated, but until World War II, examinations were extended essays spread over several days. Successful candidates then faced a rather casual oral exam (basically an interview) that was designed mainly to ensure that prospective diplomats were, as a Canadian commentator described it, neither “rustic or colonial,” yet were also “proper but not stuffy.” That bar- rier surmounted, frequently they were introduced to the prime minis- ter. By the 1960s, the volume of appli- cants had driven the testing process increasingly toward objective, stan- dardized exams; the hallowed essay first became a 90-minute effort and, in 1968, was completely eliminated. These tests, combined with a subse- quent short interview (and a review of the applicant’s curriculum vitae) were the determining factors. At the same time, there was also a steady move- ment away from hiring pure “general- ists” toward specialists, particularly in law and economics. Primarily for fiscal reasons, during the 1980s recruitment became spo- radic, and no entrance exam was administered in some years. In 1994, the official examination notice made clear that only graduates in econom- ics, law or business administration would be considered — the only exception being experts in Mandarin, Arabic, Japanese, Russian or Korean. The notice was blunt: Candidates without these qualifications — even if they “attain the highest scores in the country” — would not make the cut. Predictable screams of academic anguish reversed these draconian restrictions, leading to the introduc- tion of a battery of tests that would be familiar to U.S. candidates: a variety of knowledge-based timed tests for the “written” portion and an oral exam that includes a “group simulation exercise” and a written essay on a gen- eral socio-political topic. Currently, while only a university degree is required to take the exam, most candidates have postgraduate degrees. Structure of the System The Canadian Foreign Service encompasses immigration and trade officers as well as political/economic officers. While the U.S. rank struc- ture system is roughly parallel to that of our military establishment, with six officer ranks and three “flag ranks,” Canada’s has three basic levels: devel- opmental (non-tenured), working (mid-level) and executive (senior). Within each level, there are different salary levels but no formal gradations in rank. New Entrants. Newly minted 44 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / M A R C H 2 0 0 5