The Foreign Service Journal, September 2014

THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | SEPTEMBER 2014 45 Pakistan later told me: “We are so afraid of saying the wrong thing that we end up not saying anything at all.” We Can Do Better Using the Malala example as a starting point, my dissent cable provided a platform for broader reflection on how we as a Foreign Service could do better. Like many officers, I have been frustrated over the years at the complicated and uncer- tain clearance process, which all too often stifles or discour- ages outreach. At times, the clearance process itself seems more like a capricious obstacle course than a catalyst for effec- tive public diplomacy. Drawing on these frustrations, I used the dissent cable to highlight several areas of special concern. First, our clearance processes are too cumbersome. While serving in Mongolia the previous year, it was disappointing to discover that it took no fewer than 32 signatures to clear an innocuous, book-length manuscript that was finally published by Hong Kong University Press. Something is seriously amiss when it takes longer to clear a document than it does to write or translate it. Second, meaningful engagement is sometimes squashed before it even happens. A control-oriented approach based on decisions made thousands of miles away breeds a tendency to steer clear of any media exposure, even when permission is likely to be granted. All too often we “overthink” issues, avoiding potential “negatives” that may or may not exist. Deci- sions also sometimes seem to be made based on a fear about the “heavy scrutiny” that will follow, with careers damaged because of perceptions that someone has “misspoken” or is somehow “off message.” Third, we are too reticent in taking on extreme narratives directly, including radical Islamist ones. The fact that we don’t publish meaningful articles in the local press because of The best public diplomacy often takes place at a purely local level—and it is precisely this point that needs to figure more prominently in both the clearance process and in our approach to outreach. misplaced concerns about conspiracy theories elsewhere suggests we have prematurely sur- rendered on the information front. Somehow we need to become more confident about the ideals and foundations on which our own society is built, to challenge more directly those who are committed to violently destroy- ing them. A Policy for “Serious Times” My intent in writing the dissent cable on Malala in February 2013 was to help pre- cipitate an internal discussion on important public affairs matters and to make the case for an approach that is more nimble, less bureaucratic and gives greater authority to the field. The mandatory official response to the original dissent cable suggested that the timing had not been right for an article on Malala, given the sensitivities involved and the pos- sibly counterproductive consequences of having a U.S. official publicly comment on a case that was already being widely discussed in Pakistan. At the same time, it acknowledged that the department could perhaps have been better attuned to the merits of publishing commentary like this in the more local- ized context of Kandahar. From my perspective, the “missed opportunity” did, indeed, stem from a failure to recognize that the best public diplomacy often takes place at a purely local level—and it is precisely this point that needs to figure more prominently in both the clearance process and in our approach to outreach. Hopefully this year’s Christian A. Herter Award will give fur- ther impetus and visibility to this important discussion. Finally, it is my sincere hope that this award will bring greater recognition to those who serve or have served in extraordinarily difficult and even dangerous circumstances, including most especially colleagues in Kandahar and across southern Afghanistan. More than two centuries ago, two former political adversar- ies, both also former presidents, engaged in a long and historic correspondence. John Adams, in one of his letters to Thomas Jefferson, at one point noted that the two of them had lived in “serious times.” We, too, live in serious, even momentous, times. Hopefully, our entire Foreign Service can directly confront the challenges that we face in ways that are truly serious and, ultimately, make a lasting difference. n