The Foreign Service Journal, May 2009

M A Y 2 0 0 9 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 17 200 officers overseas. Increasingly, senior officers say, inexperienced officers with little training are being put in charge of posts as veteran of- ficers retire. The Foreign Agricultural Serv- ice also has little bench strength. “A very big concern is that we don’t have flexibility to hire and train new people,” says Ambassador Suzanne Hale, the agency’s acting administrator. “Half of our For- eign Service officers are eligible to retire.” “To me, it’s not about the immediate shortfall; it’s look- ing at the long term,” says Keith Curtis, AFSA’s FCS vice president. “And in the long term our personnel down- ward trend almost looks like a death spiral on the chart.” The agencies’ private-sector clients are concerned as well. “As a result of FAS programs and the weak dollar, agricultural exports have doubled in three years’ time,” says Annie Durbin, executive director of the U.S. Agri- cultural Export Development Council. “We can put it in terms of jobs. If we lose farm jobs because we lose ex- port opportunities and therefore exports, jobs for those individuals will have to be found somewhere else. And it will be much more difficult to do that now, in this econ- omy.” U.S. manufacturers share the view. “Manufacturers want commercial advocacy overseas,” says Gary Litman, U.S. Chamber of Commerce vice president for European policy and initiatives. “They think it’s essential, and they’re looking at the Europeans and Chinese stepping up commercial advocacy and thinking that the ambivalent situation right now in the U.S. isn’t serving us well.” Doing More with Less That’s not to say agency leaders aren’t aware of the sit- uation. FAS’s Hale is concerned about training and hiring. And top Commercial Service officials express frustration that foreign rivals are outpacing them in promoting their businesses. “We have found that there has been a lot more focus by many foreign countries on advocacy and on trade promotion,” says William Zarit, deputy assistant secretary for international operations at FCS. Officers at both agencies say more funding could make a big difference, rattling off numbers to show how invest- ment in export promotion could yield huge dividends be- cause there is so much room for growth. Of 27 million U.S. businesses, only 250,000 ex- port, for example. And of those that export, 60 percent only export to one market. This is the case at a time when 70 percent of the world’s purchasing power and 95 percent of its population are outside the United States. “Our job is to help create and sustain jobs,” Zarit says, adding that his officers now “see and understand the importance of our mission” more than ever before. In 2008, the Foreign Agricultural Service helped bring in $20 billion through its trade promotion efforts for U.S. agricultural exports. At the Commercial Service, the fig- ure was $70 billion. The return on investment — when the jobs and follow-on economic activity generated by those exports is considered — is substantial. Some esti- mates place it at $400 for every $1 the taxpayer invests. Even so, flat funding persists. And it continues at a time when both agencies are being asked to do more. Of- ficers in the field say it’s hard to perform the basic match- making service both agencies provide — connecting U.S. exporters with foreign importers — when travel budgets are tight. True, in the age of e-mail officers can interact with their U.S. clients despite distance and time-zone differ- ences. And webinars have enabled the agencies to pro- vide services to their clients without incurring travel costs. But the technology is a “double-edged sword,” says one commercial officer based in the Middle East. “It has helped us reach out and be far more efficient, but at the same time, [it has] increased the workload. We are just an e-mail click away from anybody. They can go on our beautiful Web site and directly send us questions, which is wonderful. But the resources needed to process that have not been made available.” Investments in trade agencies are investments in the future. The gains are not instantaneous, officers point out, and so it’s easy for Congress to ignore the Foreign Agri- cultural Service and U.S. & Foreign Commercial Service at budget time. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have se- verely squeezed discretionary spending. And going for- ward, ballooning Medicare and Social Security costs pose continuing budget challenges. “You have to look at what’s going on in the broader pic- ture,” says Hale. “There’s just going to be pressure F O C U S “If there was ever a time to invest in promoting U.S. exports, today is it.” — Nicholas Kuchova, Senior Commercial Service officer