The Foreign Service Journal, May 2012

M A Y 2 0 1 2 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 35 House no longer work for the Maghreb. Transferring those countries from the Bureau of African Affairs to the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs made sense in the mid-1970s, when pan-Arabism was at its height and Morocco, Tunisia and Alge- ria all pursued Arabization to re- inforce new national identities and lessen dependence on Eu- ropean languages imposed during the colonial era. That structure makes little sense now, however, for those countries increasingly see themselves as separate from the Middle East, have never fully Arabized, and self-identify now more as Africans or part of a commu- nity of Mediterranean states. The AF/NEA “seam” already complicates proper functioning of the Trans-Sahara Counterterrorism Part- nership. Except for Libya, no recent NEA assistant sec- retary has been able to devote much time to Maghreb issues or the development, with AF, of a coherent strat- egy for dealing with the many crosscutting issues affect- ing northwest Africa. The deputy assistant secretary covering North Africa has for years also been the DAS for the Arabian Peninsula, so it’s no surprise that the peninsula grabs most of that official’s attention, even when he or she brings considerable Maghreb experience to the job. The Maghreb office in NEA attracts high-caliber and motivated individuals, but few of them have had much direct experience in the region, given the low priority it is accorded within the bureau. At the White House, the situation has been even worse; there the portfolio has largely been a hot potato thrown among overworked di- rectors with no Maghreb experience who are more in- terested in higher-visibility Near and Middle East issues. Time for a Fresh Approach The solution is a new structure that would embrace the Maghreb’s hybrid nature. At State, it would involve creating a DAS position that straddles the NEA/AF di- vide and covers all of northwest Africa. Reporting to both AF and NEA assistant secretaries would facilitate policy development and improve coordination in its im- plementation. The new structure would also make working with the Defense De- partment and the Africa Com- mand, which already consider the Maghreb part of Africa, much easier. Such a reorganization would require new thinking about budgeting and staffing, in Wash- ington and overseas, and require seventh-floor backing to over- come institutional opposition. But the long-term benefits would include the ability to react to and anticipate regional challenges more sys- tematically, as well as the opportunity to develop a cadre of regional experts familiar with the key issues. For the sake of symmetry, the National Security Council should follow suit in creating a hybrid director position that would report to both the Near East/North Africa and Africa divisions. From this starting point, the rest flows readily. Sus- F OCUS The AF/NEA “seam” already complicates proper functioning of the Trans-Sahara Counter- terrorism Partnership.