The Foreign Service Journal, July-August 2008

J U LY- A U G U S T 2 0 0 8 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 5 The Secretary of State is the president’s principal foreign poli- cy adviser and is responsible for the formulation and execution of foreign policy. But does the description of duties for the posi- tion also include a requirement to act as the leader and manager of the State Department? Two secretaries in recent decades definitely thought so. Among other achievements, George Shultz (1982- 1989) invested much personal effort in securing funding to build the Foreign Service Institute’s Arlington Hall cam- pus and Colin Powell (2001-2005) devoted considerable time and atten- tion to securing funding to increase Foreign Service staffing. In contrast, others have not been known for paying attention to manage- ment issues. James Baker (1989-1992) opened over a dozen new embassies in the former Soviet Union without seek- ing additional staffing from Congress. Warren Christopher (1993-1997) and Madeleine Albright (1997-2001) presid- ed over what is now universally seen as an ill-advised downsizing of diplomatic staffing that left a hollowed-out Foreign Service. So the question remains: Is it possi- ble for a Secretary of State to be deemed successful if he or she focuses on policy issues while mostly ignoring the leadership and management of the platform upon which diplomacy and development assistance are conducted? Of course, it is only fair to note that every secretary must delegate many management tasks. It is also true that no sin- gle individual has the ability to compel the White House and Congress to provide the resources to meet the needs of diplomacy and devel- opment assistance. Nonetheless, the position of Secre- tary of State is a uniquely powerful one from which to advocate for the depart- ment. When it comes to duties such as lobbying for resources and other man- agement needs, there are some meet- ings, phone calls and letters that an agency head cannot delegate without significantly weakening their impact. Thus, a deficit of top-level advocacy can damage the long-term prospects for diplomatic engagement. Diplomacy and development assis- tance can suffer if staffing is too small to accomplish the tasks demanded of it, if embassies and consulates lack adequate operating budgets, if Foreign Service members are unable to obtain needed training, and if the uniformed military ends up taking on civilian responsibilities for which it is ill-suited. They can also suffer if Foreign Service morale is erod- ed by growing financial disincentives and worsening conditions of service. Thus, the answer to our question is clear: No Secretary of State can be judged to have been successful if he or she leaves behind a weakened diplo- matic infrastructure as a result of having dedicated inadequate time and energy to preserving and strengthening it. History will inevitably judge the cur- rent and future holders of that position not only on their foreign policy accom- plishments, but also on their leadership and management of the State Depart- ment. Therefore, even if administration is not their favorite activity, Secretaries of State must make it a daily priority. Those who do not will be judged nega- tively for that failure. In the past, such judgments have come, but only in whispered hallway talk or in scholarly books published long after the official left office. In the future, however, those assessments will come more quickly and be more widely disseminated. Journalists are growing more savvy, paying attention not only to international negotiations but also to underlying issues, such as budget and staffing needs. Think-tanks and advoca- cy groups are starting to issue more pointed analyses of the management of diplomacy and development assistance. And employees are speaking out more, as evidenced in AFSA’s continuing sur- veys of Foreign Service member views on key management issues. So let the word go out that the work requirements for the Secretary of State position have been updated. Just as uni- versity presidents are no longer just scholars, but are also expected to be managers and fundraisers, Secretaries of State can no longer just be foreign policy experts, but must also come pre- pared to lead andmanage. If they fail to do so, it will be noted. n P RESIDENT ’ S V IEWS Work Requirements B Y J OHN K. N ALAND John K. Naland is the president of the American Foreign Service Association.