The Foreign Service Journal, March 2007

Hussein’s secret caches throughout Iraq. Subsequently, the Congress appropriated funding from the Depart- ment of Defense budget for the CERP, and included funds for firefighting, repair of damage to oil facilities and related infrastructure, and medical assistance to Iraqi children. Building on the experience in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Defense Department requested and received author- ity to broaden a previously existing Combatant Commander Initiative Fund to allow combatant com- manders to carry out such projects in any countries where military operations are being conducted. Combatant commanders are now funding joint military exercises, military education and training, and humani- tarian and civic projects that include medical and veteri- nary care, construction of transportation systems, wells, sanitation facilities and landmine clearance and educa- tion. Such an expansion of military-provided humanitarian and civic assistance is nowhere more evident than in the Horn of Africa. The U.S. Central Command oversees some 1,800 troops stationed at Camp Lemonier, Djibouti, who are tasked with building health clinics, wells and schools in remote areas where government influence is weak and terrorists are known to be recruit- ing. In an effort to provide evidence of alternatives to religious extremism, small military teams train local forces, gain access and gather information, and provide practical assistance in an attempt to improve the lives of local residents in areas that terrorists may be targeting. Staff found that country teams in embassies with a USAID presence are far more capable of ensuring suffi- cient review of military humanitarian assistance projects than those that have no USAID office. Budgetary cut- backs at USAID, affecting both personnel and programs, are repeatedly cited as a deficiency in the U.S. campaign against extremism in susceptible regions of the world. Public Information. The Defense Department has taken on the additional mission under the direction of the Secretary of Defense to counter terrorist propaganda in key regions and countries of the world. The purpose is to discourage sympathy for terrorists and their efforts to recruit, marginalize radical Islamic ideology, and increase popular support for U.S. operations and multilateral counterterrorism activities. In one of its most recent for- ays into the civilian world of international public affairs broadcasting, the Pentagon has produced a report that is highly critical of the Broadcasting Board of Governors’ radio and TV broadcasting into Iran. In embassies, mili- tary teams of three or four persons are being sent to key countries to carry out informational programs. There are currently 18 such deployments, expected to rise to 30 countries if current plans are realized. Reactions from the Field Ambassadors in every country pursue a wide-ranging agenda running the gamut from managing the overall relationship with the host country to resolving trade dis- putes and rescuing Americans in trouble. All ambas- sadors interviewed by the staff, with the exception of [the one in] Thailand, reported an increase in military per- sonnel in their embassies since 9/11. One ambassador heading a small embassy in Africa reported that American uniformed personnel may outnumber civilian personnel within the year. All ambassadors interviewed see the war on terror as a top priority and the military components of the embassy as one tool that can be used to address it. For the most part, ambassadors welcome the additional resources that the military brings and they see strong military-to-mili- tary ties as an important ingredient in a strong bilateral relationship. Nonetheless, State and USAID personnel often question the purposes, quantity and quality of the expanded military activities in-country. Ambassadors are the president’s personal representa- tive and top U.S. official in-country. Every ambassador has country-clearance authority. Often permission to work at the embassy is granted routinely to interagency personnel coming on either permanent or temporary assignment. But every ambassador has the power to deny clearance or to suspend it once granted. As one U.S. ambassador stated, “The rule is, if you’re in-country, you work for the ambassador. If you don’t think you work for the ambassador, you don’t get country clearance to come in.” In most cases, ambassadors seemed informed about U.S. military activities in-country and appeared willing and able to provide leadership. In three embassies visit- ed, however, ambassadors appeared overwhelmed by the growing presence of military personnel and insistent requests from combatant commanders. Neither were the ambassadors as knowledgeable on the breadth of mil- itary activity in-country as they should have been. In one case, an ambassador to a country that is receiving Section F O C U S 56 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 7