The Foreign Service Journal, May 2016

THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | MAY 2016 13 diplomatic posts in 660 cities around the world. Yet a March 14 article from Foreign Affairs questions whether the traditional embassy is still relevant. Author Alex Oliver, a critic of the “modern” embassy, writes that many for- eign ministries have been slow to adopt social media as a mechanism for carrying out “digital diplomacy.” “Governments now communicate directly with their counterparts, and some world leaders have become prodigious users of Twitter, Facebook and Instagram, speaking to huge domestic and foreign audiences without even telling their embassies,” Oliver writes. Embassies are also behind local and international news media—and even the average civilian—in gathering and relay- ing information. But the biggest threat to the relevance and efficiency of embassy work, in Oli- ver’s view, is increased security. “Even in less dangerous countries,” he writes, “embassies are mired in security proto- cols that restrict access by locals and often confine embassy staff and diplomats to semi-safe green zones—hardly a way to get an accurate picture of events on the ground. Some embassies, particularly American ones, resemble elaborate military bunkers more than diplomatic outposts.” Oliver’s point is not that embassies are no longer important. They continue to be the crucial face and point of contact for their countries overseas, he writes, but their functions may have to shift. He offers several recommendations. Instead of providing up-to-the-minute information, embassies should focus on providing context to news and informa- tion, helping their governments sort out relevant information from the media noise and identifying key potential partners. Governments must also accept that risk is inherent to the diplomatic profes- sion and allow diplomats to interact with locals directly, Oliver states. —Shannon Mizzi, Editorial Assistant ISIS Actions Declared “Genocide” S ecretary of State John Kerry announced on March 17 that the State Department, and by extension the Obama administration, has determined that the actions of the so-called Islamic State group, ISIS, in both Iraq and Syria against minority groups, including Yazidis, Christians and Shiite Muslims, meet the criteria to be designated “genocide. ” The House of Representatives unani- mously voted for a genocide designation on March 14, giving the State Department a March 17 deadline to decide on a dec- laration of its own. The decision comes on the heels of a prior declaration by the European Union parliament, which deliv- ered a similar unanimous vote on Feb. 4. The United Nations Convention on Genocide defines genocide as “the inten- tional destruction, in whole or in part, of a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.” As media and nonprofit investigative reports have shown, ISIS is responsible for systematically executing thousands of Yazidi and Christian men and elderly women, and kidnapping thousands of younger Yazidi women and girls, holding or selling them into sex slavery. This is only the second time the United States has recognized an ongoing geno- cide. The first was in 2004, when Secre- tary Powell called attention to Darfur in Sudan, but very little of significance was done in the wake of that declaration. Studies show, however, that events labeled “genocide”—rather than “crimes against humanity” or “ethnic cleansing”— have elicited more forceful action from governments historically, despite the fact