The Foreign Service Journal, March 2021

44 MARCH 2021 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL on officers’ time and attention, completely inhibiting proper engagement with the local society and, thus, the ability to go the proverbial “last three feet.” The paperwork involved and the train- ing to do that management work suck the energy out of engaged, culturally informed strategic public diplomacy officers. The lack of management support is the main reason we’ve lost the granularity and effectiveness of programming based on contact relationships. Public diplomacy needs dedicated management in the field. One possible solution would be to embed in a public affairs section a dedicated management officer, trained in grant administration, budget and personnel systems, who has been cross-evaluated by the PAO and the management counselor. Another would be to revert to the USIA model of having a man- agement specialist answerable to the PAO. Peter Kovach, a retired FSO with the rank of Minister Counselor, lives in Bethesda, Maryland. Merge State and USAID USAID is an essential institution of our foreign policy, serving as an operational, on-the-ground unit under the policy direc- tion of the State Department. For decades, USAID and State have jousted over the proper role of development assistance in foreign policy, often doing so from a common misunderstanding of their roles. This is due in large part to USAID being viewed (wrongly) by State and other federal colleagues as a simple technocratic implementer of policy, one deficient in strategic vision and lacking a proper theoretical basis for its actions. As a result, USAID has been denied a permanent, senior position at the National Security Council or in policy discussions. Officially merging USAID with State would solve a great deal of this disconnect, thereby bringing Senior USAID Foreign Service officers to the table, in the same building, on a routine basis with State, if not on occasion with Department of Defense colleagues. Those who argue for a continued formal separation between State and USAID struggle to define exactly what differenti- ates them in practice. Similarly, those who are adamant about maintaining the “uniqueness” of USAID’s functions fail to recognize that its specialties of development, humanitarian assistance, governance and conflict resolution cannot be prop- erly implemented without a formal connection to other larger institutions, such as State and Defense. In this age of nonstate actors, flexible views of a nation’s sover- eignty and forever-unfolding complex conflicts, USAID’s influence and on-the-ground presence are needed more than ever. USAID was formed during the height of the Cold War to advocate and create the conditions for a capitalist market system; we competed with another system that has been thor- oughly discredited. We have won that debate. Let’s now make sure USAID is present at the policy discussions and has a say in determining when and why we will engage in a country or region to shape and assist. If we are an integral part of State, we will have a proper and regular forum in which to participate. If not, we will continue to be an afterthought. Peter F. Kranstover is a retired USAID FSO in Cedarburg, Wisconsin. Invest in Language Training My advice: Carefully consider the positive benefits and com- petitive advantage of investing in language proficiency training, especially in esoteric or less widely spoken tongues. Our Foreign Service Institute language school and com- mitment to training set us apart and open doors locally that would otherwise be closed. One Australian colleague in Laos, for example, expressed wonder at the extensive training our officers received in Lao. We used those language skills to gain local connections and insight, bolstering the United States’ odds in geopolitical competition. (The Russians and Chinese certainly spend the time and money to train their diplomats in less common dialects.) It might be tempting to look at the FSI budget and save money by cutting courses in Amharic, Bengali or Finnish. But that would be a mistake that hinders the long-term strength of our Service. FSO Matthew H. Kustel is global affairs unit chief at U.S. Embassy Seoul. Rely on Us for Substantive Policy The new administration will face unprecedented skepti- cism concerning America’s place in the world and the dura- bility of U.S. foreign policy. But it can reinvigorate American diplomacy, utilizing the Foreign Service to develop substan- tive courses of action and policy execution. Here are a couple suggestions.