The Foreign Service Journal, June 2007

J U N E 2 0 0 7 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 5 Randall Tobias’ sudden de- parture from USAID provides an unexpected opportunity to pause in the “reform” of U.S. foreign assistance and examine where we are and where we’re going. Done largely in the dead of night under the rubric of har- monization with Secretary Rice’s sig- nature “transformational diplomacy” initiative, it involved only minimal con- sultation with Congress and America’s diverse foreign aid constituency. The gap between the rhetoric and the real- ity of his wholesale changes is greater than on any issue I’ve seen over the past 18 months, even Iraq. Despite Tobias’ denials that a “stealth merger” with the State De- partment would occur and his reassur- ances that long-term development and poverty reduction remained USAID’s overarching goals, the systematic evis- ceration of USAID is well under way. During the last fiscal year the agency has hired 29 new FSOs, while 65 retired. This year it hired another 29, while over 100 are expected to retire, many voluntarily as they vote with their feet. Remember the debilitating impact of the State Department’s hiring well below attrition in the mid-1990s? At USAID the situation is alreadymuch worse. Almost 30 percent of the posi- tions in the Africa Bureau are vacant, as the agency’s top management position has been for two years. Chronic underfunding of USAID’s Operating Expenses account — to support its people and the costs of maintaining them in the field — has led to a long, slow decline in its ability to play its proper role in U.S. foreign policy. The agency that is the key to transforma- tional diplomacy is being stripped of its ability to do what Sec. Rice says she wants done. The coup de grace in the recent sudden rush to gut USAID, though, is the administration’s explicit call for a 15-percent cut in its OE account in FY 2008. This will lead to RIFs, fur- loughs, less management oversight, and the mass closing of USAID mis- sions overseas. The Africa Bureau already has plans to eliminate 12, including those in such well-perform- ing countries as Ghana, Tanzania, Mozambique and Senegal — if Congress agrees to the reduction. This will have a profound impact not only on AFSA’s constituency at USAID, but also for our foreign policy effectiveness in terms of our political and diplomatic clout in both recipient and donor capitals. It will also greatly limit the options open to the next administration, regardless of which party wins the 2008 election. There is broad agreement that some reform of the U.S. foreign assis- tance allocation process is needed, both to better match our aid with for- eign policy goals and to consolidate the 50 or so aid spigots that Congress has created. But Mr. Tobias’ overwhelm- ing rhetorical focus on process obscur- ed the substantive and operational impact of the changes, which were never analyzed. He seemed, by cut- ting back so sharply an already woeful- ly understaffed system, to be trying to eliminate the agency’s capacity to do anything beyond contracting with pri- vate sector consultants to implement projects. For example, USAID’s ap- paratus for developing and analyzing development policy (i.e., what to use aid to do and then how well we’re doing it) was abolished last year when he moved to the State Depart- ment, which does not have that capac- ity. So when Mr. Tobias talked about matching resources with policy priori- ties, he meant which countries to assist, not what to do with the money. But if our aid is to be “transformation- al,” the latter is crucial. When there is such a huge chasm between what I’m hearing and what I’m seeing, instinct and experience tell me to trust my eyes. The only expla- nation that makes any sense to me is that USAID is being intentionally gut- ted. Perhaps Mr. Tobias thought the best way to institutionalize his “reforms” was to make turning back the clock such a slow and painful process that the only realistic alterna- tive would be to simply eliminate USAID and shift the remnants to the State Department. As his successor takes the reins on an interim basis and then navigates the confirmation process, I hope that all interested parties will use this oppor- tunity to consider these issues and ensure that our national interests are not harmed by either the intended or unintended consequences of Mr. Tobias’ “reforms.” ■ P RESIDENT ’ S V IEWS Tobias, Transformational Diplomacy and the Evisceration of USAID B Y J. A NTHONY H OLMES J. Anthony Holmes is the president of the American Foreign Service Association.