The Foreign Service Journal, June 2018

32 JUNE 2018 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL CYBERCOM’s mission is clear: to defend the Department of Defense’s information networks; to help defend the nation’s critical infrastructure (e.g., transportation, water, electrical grid, banking) and to help support other combatant commands’ mission execu- tion. CYBERCOM is specifically directed to work with interagency and international partners to execute these critical missions. Getting There That work inspired me to later go through the extraordinary application process for an assignment with CYBERCOM. In addition to completing State’s lengthy bidding process, and being approved by the military commander for the foreign policy adviser (POLAD) assignment, the successful candidate must pass a polygraph. Taking a polygraph is no simple matter for an FSO—the State Department does not use the polygraph, so hurdles included getting permission from the Secretary to take the test, as well as finding a secure facility convenient to my post where it could be administered. I did take the test, and passed. And soon after, I established myself in the spacious POLAD office on CYBERCOM’s “Seventh Floor” equivalent in the building it shares with the National Security Agency. Last August, President Donald J. Trump directed that U.S. Cyber Command be elevated to a full combat- ant command, and directed the secretary of defense, working with the director of national intelligence, to give him a recom- mendation regarding the future command relationship between the U.S. Cyber Command and the National Security Agency. * I joined some of the most impressive, dedi- cated, hardworking men and women with whom I’ve had the honor to serve—top to bottom. The issues we dealt with were urgent: life and death, and hair-on-fire constant. Under the onslaught of cyber and other operations of varying levels of seriousness against U.S. interests and those of our allies, we struggled to provide well-planned and well-supported options that were fully informed by our policy priorities for the commander, secretary of defense and president to anticipate attacks or respond. My personal rank was equivalent to that of a two-star flag officer; and, happily, my counterterrorism experience and my regional expertise made me a welcomed member of the leadership team. At CYBERCOM, not only does an FSO find herself in the midst of military culture and language, but because of the nature of this theater, one is also in the midst of an intel culture and language. The POLAD course and handbook that State provides are enor- mously useful, but I had to pushmyself hard to navigate the culture and lingo differences with confidence. The vocabulary differences between agencies are real; the thought pattern differences are real; and the measurements of success are different, too. Our value will be increased by gaining familiarity with these differences long before we take up a military-related assignment. The FSO’s Secret Sauce Our expertise, as diplomats, in adapting to new cultures and languages quickly is what makes our role as intimate teammem- bers so essential to a holistic definition of success in this arena. In my experience, interagency and international cyber cooperation is usually undertaken with the best of intentions and solid goodwill, but prejudices, misunderstandings, missteps and cross purposes come with the territory. One of the first challenges for the success- ful State Department officer in this arena is learning the terms of art: cyber event, cyber attack, cyber threat, cyber operation and cyber warfare are just a few. I found each of those terms often used interchangeably, or meant for different things, or two differ- ent words used for the same thing, depending on who used them. Definitions were still being firmed up. There were stereotypes to overcome, as well. I worked to pro- tect State from the criticism that we would analyze and weigh an option until it was too late to use it, and I flagged the reverse concern to my CYBERCOM colleagues—namely that DOD was more likely to push too quickly for actions that carried the dan- ger of unanticipated negative impacts. ISTOCKPHOTO.COM/PIXTUM *On May 4, as this issue went to press, U.S. Cyber Command was elevated to an independent “unified command,” giving it equal sta tus with the nine other U.S. military commands around the world. In addi- tion, U.S. Army General Paul Nakasone took over the leadership spot at CYBERCOM, and was double-tapped to also serve as director of the National Security Agency.