The Foreign Service Journal, July-August 2015

32 JULY-AUGUST 2015 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL rampant. As the AAD explains so well, we need urgently to return the department to what is needed to conduct the nation’s foreign policy: a meritocracy. —An active-duty FSO Elitism Doesn’t Equal Demographic Exclusivity I just wanted to express my support for the concept of an elite Foreign Service—with the caveat that elitism doesn’t translate into privilege and exclusivity for a few members of America’s demographics. The Department of State has a long way to go before it establishes a Foreign Service reflective of the country’s current and changing demographics. The aphorism “Male, Yale and Pale” needs to be permanently relegated to a footnote of American diplomatic history. —Irvin Hicks Jr. Management-coned officer Bureau of African Affairs Management Rover Embassy Libreville We Need to Change the Paradigm T he biggest problem affecting the Foreign Service today— with implications for all of the concerns expressed in the AAD report—is that the American public does not understand why it should fund us, and why a professional Foreign Service is needed at all. That, in turn, is related to the way that we define and market our Service. AFSA, AAD and other supporters of the Foreign Service define us as America’s diplomats. That is a misleading and extraordinarily dangerous definition for a 21st-century Foreign Service that includes members of many professions, includ- ing diplomacy, who share certain skill sets and obligations that enable us to perform our numerous professions in support of American interests overseas. Defining our entire Service in terms of its most elite and eso- teric members perpetuates the stereotype of the Foreign Service as elitist and out of touch with the day-to-day needs of ordinary Americans. Most congressional constituents don’t care about the ability of an American ambassador to negotiate a treaty, or under- stand why a civil servant or political appointee cannot do equally well at the task. The AAD report’s excellent explanation of why the differences matter is not going to matter to them. We also don’t highlight enough the work of consular officers, Diplomatic Security special agents, commercial officers and others who not only produce the bulk of the product that means the most to our clients, but also perform jobs with which average Americans can identify. The average American has never met an ambassador. But they know a doctor. An IT professional. An office manager. A logistician. A security professional. A public relations professional. Amarketer. They know people in professions similar to those comprising the bulk of positions in the Foreign Service. We need to change the paradigm to make our profession more understandable and accessible to those who fund us and evaluate our product. We need to tell the American public a story about people who do jobs familiar to most Americans, but do those jobs in far-away, sometimes isolated, sometimes dangerous places, using specialized skills and accumulated experience to produce products—ranging fromAmerican citizen services, trade creation, aviation safety and environmental protection to national security—that benefit Americans. Until we can tell that story, the concerns expressed in the AAD study won’t resonate with our clients and won’t resonate with Congress. —Daniel Hirsch Management Officer Management Counselor Embassy Tunis Specialists Don’t Count? I am an Office Management Specialist with State, serving in one of largest consular sections in the world. I work my butt off in a section of more than 60 direct hires and 120 local staffers. My section makes up at least half of the consulate. I stopped reading American Diplomacy at Risk when it stated that specialists didn’t count. —Linley G. Wartenberg Office Management Specialist Consulate General Guangzhou “We need tomake our profession more understandable and accessible to those who fund us and evaluate our product.” —Daniel Hirsch