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 7 Shining Light on PRTs Your March issue on relations between the Foreign Service and the military is a resounding success. It throws much-needed light on little- understood aspects of our govern- ment’s civilian efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, which are rarely covered by either the print or electronic media. I was particularly impressed with Danny Hall’s article on serving on a PRT in Afghanistan, an incisive analy- sis full of cogent detail and wry humor. It made me almost want to be there. (Almost!) Hall may not know it, but he’s an extremely talented writer who captivates his reader’s attention and holds it to the very last sentence. Kudos to him and to the editors! Albert Ball FSO, retired Temecula, Calif. State Structures and Staffing I’d like to offer some historical per- spective on the concerns about State Department structures and staffing found in the March Journal . The let- ters to the editor giving pros and cons on the proposed move of the trans- portation office and other employee services from the Truman Building to SA-1 called to mind an earlier instance when the shifting of the department’s facilities sparked heated debate. In his book Present at the Creation , Dean Acheson describes how the issue of State moving from the Old Executive Office Building to its cur- rent location in Foggy Bottom “had been tearing the department apart for six months” before George Marshall was sworn in as Secretary of State in January 1947. Only moments after Marshall took the oath of office and Acheson briefed him on this issue, the retired general ordered State to “Move!” Decades after the department left Pennsylvania Avenue, the controversy continued. In a speech to the depart- ment a few years ago, the late senator and former ambassador Daniel Pat- rick Moynihan observed, “When State moved out of the Old Executive Office Building, a new State Depart- ment — the National Security Coun- cil — moved right in.” Nevertheless, American diplomacy survived this major disruption. The record sug- gests that the department might also continue to thrive despite the shifting of employee services across the street. In his AFSA News piece, “Over- hauling the Foreign Service Exam,” AFSA State Vice President Steve Kashkett writes that one of the goals of the new FS exam process is “to make sure it attracts the best and the brightest people who can handle the unique challenges facing us overseas today.” I occasionally hear this term used as part of human resources dis- cussions within the department. But while State surely has many commit- ted and clever employees, I find “the best and the brightest” to be a bit off- putting and even ironic. The phrase was popularized by the late David Halberstam’s best-selling 1969 book of the same name, which addressed U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War. The phrase referred to President Kennedy’s “whiz kids” — leaders of industry and academia brought into his administration — whom Halberstam characterized as arrogantly insisting on “brilliant poli- cies that defied common sense” in Vietnam, often against the advice of career State Department employees. Indeed, Halberstam (who passed away in April) recently wrote this about the term: “It went into the lan- guage, although it is often misused, failing to carry the tone of irony that the original intended.” Daniel P. Sheerin Civil Service Program Analyst Washington, D.C. The Real “Cautionary Tale” For a member of the European literati to grotesquely distort history in order to bash President Bush is unex- ceptional. For the New York Times to publish an opinion piece by that author, Robert Harris, apparently without checking the facts, is the norm for that publication. But for the editor of the Foreign Service Journal to incorporate that op-ed into his review of Harris’ book, Imperium: A Novel of Ancient Rome (Books, March), again without checking the facts, is disappointing at the very least. Harris’ tortured analogy, endorsed by Journal Editor Steve Honley in his review, equates the Bush administra- L ETTERS