The Foreign Service Journal, March 2013

THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | MARCH 2013 17 he Foreign Service is in crisis; and the tragedy is that most of its members are completely unaware of it. Over the past four decades, the Foreign Service has gone from the premier foreign affairs agency, spawning innovative officers like George Kennan, to a backbencher in the nation’s foreign policy formula- tion and implementation. Even as the number of senior-level positions in the Department of State has increased, the positions occupied by career FSOs have decreased both in actual number and percentage. The reasons for the decline of the career Foreign Service’s influence are not clear. One could, I suppose, argue that the increasing partisanship in American politics is a proximate cause. It is also true that the State Department’s leadership wishes to have people in key decision-making positions who are in line with its thinking—whom it can trust to carry out its policies without question. It is an unfortunate fact that the department has had leaders of that stripe, but I would argue that identify- ing this as the main cause of the decline in career employee influence is far too simplistic a view of the situation. SPEAKING OUT The Foreign Service Needs a Cultural Shift BY CHARL ES RAY In a democracy such as ours, it is to be expected that the policies of those elected by the American people will be the policies of the country, to be faithfully implemented by all within the institutions responsible for doing so. After 50 years of public service (20 years in the U.S. Army and 30 years in the Foreign Service), which began dur- ing the administration of President John F. Kennedy, I have concluded that what most of our political leadership wants is answers and options from those who serve them. They want answers to ques- tions they haven’t asked, and options to deal with unknown future contingen- cies. Sadly, the career Foreign Service seems incapable of providing that. This is not because it lacks intelligent or dedicated people, of course. You won’t find a more intelligent or dedicated group anywhere within the U.S. gov- ernment, the defense establishment included. No, the career Foreign Service is unable to provide answers to unasked questions, or develop options for unknown futures, because it is ham- pered by a cultural mindset that is reac- tive rather than innovative. Its members tend to be conflict-averse, pre-emptively capitulating in the face of imagined resistance. More often than not, Foreign Service officers resist change instead of promoting it. Embracing Change Change has always been inevitable, and we live in an era when it occurs at the speed of light. That which is current today will be obsolete tomorrow, and those who resist that truth risk being left behind. This is as true in international affairs as it is in technology. Much of what happens on the inter- national stage is driven by changes in information technology. Witness the youth-led uprisings in the Arab world that began two years ago, which were facilitated by increased access to, and the proliferation of, social media and citizen journalism in the affected coun- tries. Despite this prime example of the importance of keeping up with techno- logical change, and the aggressive pro- motion of social media by our current political leadership, only a handful of Senior Foreign Service officers actively leverage the power of information Charles A. Ray retired from the Foreign Service in 2012 after a 30-year career that included ambassadorships to Cambodia and Zimbabwe. Ambassador Ray also served as deputy assis- tant secretary of Defense for prisoners of war/missing personnel affairs, deputy chief of mission in Freetown and consul general in Ho Chi Minh City, among many other assignments. Prior to joining the Foreign Service, Amb. Ray spent 20 years in the U.S. Army. He currently chairs AFSA’s Professionalism and Ethics Committee, and does freelance writing and speaking. What most political leaders want from career officers is answers and options. T