The Foreign Service Journal, September 2012

10 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 2 should have generated nothing but entirely justifiable ridicule, and is shatteringly out of place in the ‘Mag- azine for Foreign Affairs Profession- als,’ whose editors (in theory, anyway) have some familiarity with foreign af- fairs.” To paraphrase the Secretary’s state- ment at the U.N.: It is quite distress- ing to read comments by two former members of the Foreign Service de- crying the right of the Foreign Service Journal to print a public statement by our hardworking and courageous Sec- retary. It is just despicable. I ask, whose side are Amb. Peck and Mr. Surber on? Obviously not on the side of an open society. The letter stands in stark contrast to the excellent interview in the same issue by Steve Honley with Ambassa- dor Bill Swing, whose service embod- ies all that the Foreign Service stands for. Amb. Swing and Ambassador George Vest (the director general of the Foreign Service, whom Amb. Swing served as deputy 25 years ago) were the two most compassionate “people persons” I ever had the privi- lege of serving with during my own FS career. We can rest assured that neither of these two gentlemen would have em- barrassed themselves as Amb. Peck and Mr. Surber have done. Peter F. Spalding Senior FSO, retired Washington, D.C. Birth Control and Liberty In writing, what one leaves out is often as telling as what one includes. That is certainly true of Ben Barber’s advocacy piece for “birth control” in the April issue, “Seven Billion and Growing.” His comments about the Obama administration’s “order” that Catholic institutions fund abortifacient drugs under the president’s health care pack- age conveniently omits reference to the religious liberty rights upon which the administration tramples. Beyond that issue, Barber rightly writes about a “battle over birth con- trol.” The current controversy is not just about preventing conception, but also about preventing birth. When Congress first entered this area with the Family Planning and Population Research Act of 1970, the bill explic- itly banned the use of federal funds to pay for abortions. Through semantic gymnastics and outright misrepresentation (e.g., con- tinuing to hawk post-conception abor- tifacients as “contraceptives”), advo- cates of “birth control” have striven mightily to provide abortionists with unfettered access to the federal trough. Whatever one thinks of Roe v. Wade — and there are significant numbers of Americans who regard it as the raw judicial imposition of bad law — advocates of its “right to pri- vacy” are in bad faith when they de- mand society at large, including those who object to abortion, become finan- cially complicit in it. Finally, considering the fiscal insol- vency (e.g., Social Security), work- force inadequacy and demographic implosion now faced by Western Eu- rope, Japan and the United States — all countries that have been interna- tional heralds of birth control — one might charitably suggest that over- population is hardly their problem. John M. Grondelski FSO American Institute in Taiwan Taipei In the Vann-guard Regarding John Limbert’s July-Au- gust article, “Celebrating Intellectual Courage: AFSA’s Constructive Dissent Awards,” I was pleased to see a men- tion of John Paul Vann as the recipient of the 1968 Herter Award for con- structive dissent. I had the definite privilege to be as- signed to the Civil Operations and Revolutionary Development Support program in Vietnam at the time that Vann was the CORDS deputy for the IV Corps, which had its headquarters in Can Tho. John Paul Vann was a most inspir- ing individual, and I believe that in- spiration followed me through my ensuing Foreign Service career. In fact, I have no doubt that his experi- ence influenced me to use the Dissent Channel (for a management issue) some years later. As it turned out, I was successful in achieving the goal that I had set out in my presentation. Without a doubt, John Paul Vann was an outstanding leader! Dick Weeks FSO, retired Washington, D.C. Thompson Theories I own a Jim Thompson silk tie. By Josh Glazerhoff’s criterion (see his May review of Joshua Kurlantzick’s bi- ography, The Ideal Man: The Tragedy of Jim Thompson and the American Way of War ), that allows me to weigh in on Mr. Thompson’s disappearance from the jungles of the Cameron Highlands. By coincidence, I arrived in Bangkok on March 4, 1967, for a two- year research assignment. Before the month was over, Thompson was re- ported missing in Malaysia. Rumors flew: first came the man- L E T T E R S