The Foreign Service Journal, July-August 2009

8 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / J U LY- A U G U S T 2 0 0 9 working there until I retired in 2002, I read the May article by Shawn Zeller (“Hoping for a Break: Foreign Trade Agencies Under Pressure”) about the Foreign Commercial Service and the Foreign Agricultural Service with great interest. But while Zeller provides a useful overview, he does understate a few points. For instance, he describes the con- flict between USFCS and the polyglot of Civil Service domestic elements that make up the Commerce Depart- ment (which is much more diverse than Agriculture, by the way). But I would add that USFCS has fought a mostly losing battle against its parent organization, the International Trade Administration, under which the FCS budget and personnel fall. It really is a zero-sum game, one in which USFCS is almost powerless to fight or defend itself. Nor does the article give sufficient weight to the deeply rooted and struc- tural conflict at overseas posts. This is not a conflict between commercial and economic officers; rather, it arises in the management of the Interna- tional Cooperative Administrative Support Services agreement that gov- erns budget, finance and general serv- ices functions at overseas posts. Most USFCS officers will admit privately that ICASS is the biggest obstacle to doing their job. In this turf battle for resources, the commercial officer is almost invariably the loser. Almost all our competitor em- bassies overseas are export machines led by their ambassadors, whose first priority and highest mission is trade, exports and economic security. U.S. ambassadors have been exhorted to think of themselves as the Most Sen- ior Commercial Officer, and a few manage to carry out that function quite well. However, whether they are fighting wars, countering terror- ism, promoting democracy, alleviating poverty, dealing with hostile regimes or worrying about environmental ne- gotiations, many ambassadors — and State’s core political team— are over- whelmed with competing priorities. Or else they are just not interested or knowledgeable about business and trade. In such situations, it is easy to toss the ball to the commercial officer and say, “Here, you deal with it.” But by doing so, the chief of mission denies U.S. business interests access to the host government’s senior-level deci- sion-makers, to whom only ambassa- dors have access. Whether or not it would hinder commercial programs to put them back into the State bu- reaucracy, where they were until 1980, doing so would at least integrate U.S. economic interests and put the commercial agenda back into the am- bassador’s portfolio. Congress has a lot of influence over funding for USFCS, of course, but the hierarchy of the Commerce Department prevents FCS from ef- fectively or independently making its case and promoting its services. At one time, we compiled a database of exporters that had been helped by the Foreign Commercial Service — organized by congressional district — showing how many jobs had been created in every state and district. If Congress had such data today, it would surely expand USFCS fund- ing. Charles Kestenbaum Senior Commercial Service Officer, retired President, B&K International Vienna, Va. Defending the Docs Terese White-Henry’s letter in the May FSJ , “On-the-Job Training for FS Doctors?”, deserves a rebuttal. I sus- pect the author had an unfortunate ex- perience. This, however, does not justify suggesting that doctors are “un- ethical” when accepting a post at which there might be conditions for which they do not have specialized training. Although the Office of Medical Services is far from perfect, it does not, to my knowledge, hire doctors, nurse practitioners or physician’s assistants who have just graduated. Rather, based on my wife’s application process, MED requires a minimum of four years’ work experience in a family practice or an emergency room. The new hires are given training in a variety of specialties, including trop- ical medicine, and all health providers attend at least one weeklong specialty area training session each year (one re- cent session was devoted to tropical medicine). The State Department health provider community is relatively small, and those taking on a post typically re- ceive a heads-up from the current oc- cupant. On arrival at post, these personnel typically visit local hospitals and interview local specialists to find those competent to treat U.S. person- nel. And when all else fails, the post practitioner can call upon all of MED’s resources, up to and including the Centers for Disease Control. State’s medical providers are essen- tially the same as U.S. family practi- tioners, and are qualified to decide which conditions can be treated on site and which ought to be referred to an outside specialist. Finally, let me offer a counterexam- ple: Is it “unethical” for a first-tour gen- eralist to accept on-the-job training L E T T E R S