The Foreign Service Journal, May 2008

the State Department Truman Building, the F Bureau does not have the staff, talent or resources to manage thousands of com- plicated technical activities being implemented worldwide. The secondobjection to creating aCabinet-level development department is that “itwould create a large, expensive andunman- aged orphan.” That is debatable: the fragmented programs that exist today couldat last have some logical, efficient andwell-man- aged structure. Some activities, such as theMCC and PEPFAR, couldbe brought under the control of the newentity. The exper- tise exists to create a well-designed department that would elim- inate current duplicative administrative structures and provide logical lines of authority. That would also gratify our develop- ment partners and the international community, which would finally understand the points of reference for dealing with us. The third objection, and in my opinion the most absurd, is that development assistance does not have the heft and popu- larity at home needed to command additional funding, leading to the dwindling away of development assistance rather than its growth. This defeatismgoes along with the idea that we need the State Depart- ment toprotect our interests. Such paternalistic attitudes can only be answered by, “Please don’t do us any favors!” Who can deny that for- eign assistance has grown more and more into our national conscience? When rock star Bono and the president himselfmake very public exhi- bitions of their support for helping the less fortunate of theworld, this isno indicationof “dwindlingaway.” And, asDefenseSecretary Robert Gatesmade abundantly clear, DOD is anxious topass off to another agency the increasing foreign assistance burden they have been forced to manage more and more often. In addition, there are many champions of foreign assistance inCongresswhose support fordevelopment programs andUSAID is increasingly felt. The bottom line is that the establishment of aCabinet-level Department of Development has a better chance of occurring now than ever. At least two of the presidential can- didates have expressed interest in the idea. The most disturbing recommendation that Adams makes is that State’s best option is to “build on the Fmodel, not to return to the past or accelerate the diaspora of our foreign relations insti- tutions.” I agree that we can’t return to the past because the cur- rentmodel is showing its age. However, repairing the vehiclewith the F model has not moved us closer to a solution. F does not stand for “fix,” as Adams states, but for “failure.” We should not keep wasting money on repairs. We need a bolder, JFK-type program to bring us into the 21st century, one that will serve us far into the future. MA Y 2 0 0 8 / F OR E I GN S E R V I C E J OU R N A L 53 A F S A N E W S prisingly, asmany of these entry- level employees had received Ara- b i c - l a n g u a g e training prior to arrival at their NEA posts, there was considerable discussion of the impact of foreign language training on assign- ments and the need for more extensive courses and other options for perfecting abilities in particularly hard languages. As was the case in previous entry-level conferences, Kashkett explains, most of the attendees expressed readiness to take on the challenges of the “new” Foreign Service career. But they are eager to see what measures State Department management is prepared to adopt to ensure fairness and equi- ty in assignments and family-friendliness under the increas- ingly difficult circumstances that State’smore junior colleagues will face in coming years. “The conference participants thoroughly enjoyed the par- ticipation of Steve Kashkett and his candidness addressing department issues and participant questions,” comments Embassy Cairo Vice Consul Tammy Crittenden Kenyatta. “He was a big hit!” Report from Cairo • Continued from page 49 AFSA NEWS BRIEFS Overweight Household Effects During the past year, AFSA has assisted in quite a few cases in which members have run afoul of the weight limits for household effects because the department-approved packing companies had grossly underestimated the weight of the employee’s shipment. In some cases, employees have been assessed overweight charges in the thousands of dollars after they had departed post. Unfortunately, in almost all of these instances, the department has taken refuge behind the rule that the traveler is responsible for ensuring that his/her shipment is within the weight limit (14 FAM 612.3), and in general the Foreign Service Grievance Board has supported the department. The lesson in these cases is: schedule your packout as early as possible, don’t rely on the pre- packout estimate, and insist on receiving the final weight prior to your departure. This will give you time before getting on the plane to ensure that items are either removed altogether or moved to storage to bring your shipment under the limit. State micromanages development assistance by overcentralizing even decisions that are better left at the country level.