The Foreign Service Journal, July-August 2010

Let me also take this opportunity to express my great respect for our Civil Service colleagues and for the intelli- gence arm in diplomatic practice. They do vital work. FSJ: Are you optimistic about the fu- ture of the profession? And when you talk to bright young people, do you rec- ommend the Foreign Service as a ca- reer? LBL: Yes, I am. DACOR holds re- ceptions for each A-100 class of new Foreign Service officers, and as a mem- ber of its Board of Governors I like to attend those when I can. I see what the new classes look like and try to size them up. I was at one of those receptions last night, and I asked several attendees to name the main things they’ve learned so far in their orientation. What do they think will stick with them during their careers? They came up with three basic things: Foreign Service members rep- resent their government all the time, not just during office hours; they nego- tiate with foreign governments on be- half of it; and they report back home on local developments. I never miss an opportunity to rec- ommend the Foreign Service, remind- ing young people what an FS career provides: a sense of service and, not least, a spirit of adventure. FSJ: There has been much talk lately of differences between tradi- tional and expeditionary diplomacy. Do you see a real conflict between the two concepts, or is that a false choice? LBL: I’mnot convinced there is any basic conflict between those two ap- proaches. The Foreign Service has al- ways been a diplomatic instrument representing U.S. interests abroad. Take the deployment of Provincial Re- construction Teams, in which Ameri- can diplomats are either participants or leaders. Advocates of an expeditionary approach often cite those as an example of what the Foreign Service should be doing. But it’s really not a new concept. When I joined the State Depart- ment in 1949, my first overseas assign- ment was as a Kreis Resident Officer in Hamburg. I arrived in Hamburg in November 1950 along with others to facilitate the transfer of authority from the U.S. Army in occupied areas of Germany and Eastern Europe back to local governments. (“Kreis” is a local district.) The idea was that when we finished our training course, my KRO class- mates and I would serve in those areas and participate in exercises intended to remind them of the kind of Nazi-dom- inated local councils they’d had, and re- mind them of the costs of continuing to follow that model. However, several of us in that class were later transferred because another need had developed: for visa-issuing officers in displaced person camps. Being a KRO is not an exact anal- ogy for anything today, of course, but there are similarities. I envy FSOs serving on Provincial Reconstruction Teams today in Afghanistan and Iraq, because they have that opportunity to help local governance develop, work- ing with our allies. One of my favorite examples is a Lithuanian-led PRT exercise in the Bamiyan area of Afghanistan. I can tell you that it never occurred to those of us posted in Kabul a good many years before that one day NATO would be promoting peace and effective local governments in distant and often-inse- cure Afghanistan, working through Provincial Reconstruction Teams. But there they are today. FSJ: Let me ask you some questions about your life before joining the For- eign Service. You wrote a memoir ti- tled Growing Up: Life on a Minnesota Farm, 1922-1940 . How did that back- ground shape you? LBL: I was born in 1922, on a small “Diplomacy is all about conveying U.S. interests abroad, and pursuing our policy objectives, in a way that looks like you’re enjoying it.” 40 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 1 0 The Laingen family in front of their house on Amb. Laingen’s return from Iran, Jan. 28, 1981. Left to right: Chip, Penne, Bruce, Bill and Jim. Photos courtesy of Bruce Laingen