The Foreign Service Journal, May 2015

THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | MAY 2015 33 A veteran FSO takes a critical look at risk tolerance—or the lack thereof. BY JAMES L . BUL LOCK James L. Bullock’s Foreign Service career with the U.S. In- formation Agency and the Department of State spanned almost 30 years, largely in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, including several unaccompanied and danger- pay assignments. After retiring from State in 2009, he moved to Egypt to serve as vice president for institutional advancement at the American University in Cairo. He is now back at State working part-time as a rehired annuitant, and also teaches, writes and volunteers. I never met the late U.S. ambassador to Libya, J. Christopher Stevens, but along with many friends and colleagues I deeply mourn his untimely death. By all accounts, he was a gifted diplomat and a steadfast colleague, whose active engagement, language skills and cultural sensitivity demonstrated the very best of the Foreign Service and are traits we should both honor and transmit systematically to our new FS colleagues. Instead, in their zeal to minimize the risks inher- ent in representing our country overseas, some are drawing precisely the wrong lessons from Chris Stevens' sacrifice. To put it bluntly, Amb. Stevens died because violent extrem- ists attacked our consulate facility in Benghazi three years ago and killed him. Let’s not blame him for doing his job. As Foreign Service personnel, together with other government civilians and Keeping Embassy Security in Perspective FOCUS ON MANAGING RISK employees of nongovernmental organizations who work alongside us in the field, we sometimes find our- selves “in harm’s way” because that is the only way we can do our jobs. Our objectives do not become less compelling just because some danger is involved. I watched this over-emphasis on minimizing risk grow steadily during my three-decade Foreign Service career, and the phenomenon contin- ues today. One way it manifests itself is in the “creeping militarization” of our diplomacy. For a variety of reasons, soldiers are increasingly being asked to take over civilian functions overseas, and not just in countries with a significant U.S. military presence. Even func- tions that remain under State’s control, like embassy security, are now heavily influenced by military priorities and requirements. Embassies now have “force protection.” But not all problems have military solutions. I say this as some- one who hasn’t always been a civilian. In both high school and college I was in the Reserve Officers’ Training Corps, and I later spent several years as a naval officer before joining the Foreign Service. During all my years in the Foreign Service, I often worked with the military, as I do now in my work as a rehired annuitant. A Trend Gains Momentum When the U.S. embassy in Beirut was bombed in April 1983, killing 63, I went there on temporary duty to replace the wounded public affairs officer. Despite a fluid and dangerous situation, COURTESY OF JIM BULLOCK A pre-departure reception for Tunisian YES exchange students in 2013. Jim Bullock is at right.