The Foreign Service Journal, March 2013

THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | MARCH 2013 11 way (“Reasons for Hope in the Israeli- Palestinian Conflict,” December Speaking Out). I regret, however, having to demur when she says she sees a one-state solu- tion as “the only viable one.” My own perspective on the endless conflict is shaped by some five years on the Palestine desk at the outset of my career, as well as assignments to Beirut and Jerusalem. Though many years of tours elsewhere and retirement have since passed, one doesn’t lose the Middle East contagion once it is acquired. It is inconceivable that Israel—and, more importantly, its vehement and influential supporters in the United States—would be willing even to consider any alteration to its status and identity as a Jewish state, a unique creature in the community of nations. For that reason alone, while a modus vivendi may, at some point down the road, be achieved between Israel and the Palestinians, I don’t believe it will come via a one-state solution. Robert L. Burns FSO, retired Santa Cruz, Calif. Storage Companies: The Urge to Merge Your January articles on transfers are timely and provide useful advice regard- ing issues that are vital to all mem- bers of the Foreign Service. I espe- cially appreciate the comments about the Government Claims Act, whose limitations continue to surprise many people. That makes it all the more important to distinguish between the concepts of origi- nal and replacement value in deciding whether to take out floater insurance. The one omission from your coverage pertains to storage of limited shipments of household effects. In the best of all worlds, moving companies who come to pack would come on dif- ferent days—one day for shipment and one day for storage. The items for storage would then be placed in boxes and an inventory compiled. In the real world, alas, storage and moving companies often merge with others, thus combining sets of effects belonging to different people. I still recall that at one point during my Foreign Ser- vice career, I had to deal with two moving and storage companies after each of themmerged with another. At the time, the Department of State was the contracting party, so the com- panies had no contractual obligation to contact me—even though I was the designated holder in due course. Both later declared bankruptcy and discarded all my belongings. This not only saddled me with a large financial loss, but most of the items were irreplaceable. Worse, State continued to pay storage bills to both defunct compa- nies. AFSA did get this situation changed, and hopefully the safeguards negotiated remain in force today: Each owner of household effects is supposed to receive some communication once a year from the storage company delineating the effects stored and the location of the storage. But one still should not depend on State or any other foreign affairs agency to notify you of any changes in the status of your things. Roy A. Harrell Jr. FSO, retired Ozona, Texas