The Foreign Service Journal, September 2015

34 SEPTEMBER 2015 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL I also happen to think he’s right. I was probably one of the few ELOs considered for the award this year. I hear that gener- ally the nomination pool is small. In fact, I hear that sometimes there are no nominees at all. So I have to ask—where is everybody? On Dissent Surely the dearth of dissent isn’t for lack of things to say. Just look at the Sounding Board. The fact that we as an institution even have Constructive Dissent Awards (thanks to AFSA) speaks volumes about our intellectual ethos. So, why don’t we speak up? It’s no secret that many officers fear using the Dissent Chan- nel. Let’s face it, the consequences to one’s career could be dire. Promotions passed over. Maligned corridor reputation. Brazen resignations that achieved—what exactly? But there are other reasons besides fear. Like complacency. Apathy. Not to mention a culture that in general seems to dis- courage creative thinking. Besides, how many dissent papers have ever actually accomplished anything? Did a war get stopped? Did a policy change? Did State change the way it operates because some- body spoke up? Cynics would say a big fat no. It’s a big risk to take, for so little measurable reward. But since I’m new, I didn’t really think about those things. I just wanted to write about what I considered unfair require- ments for transmitting citizenship for unwed mothers along our land borders. I thought I would write a dissent cable on it. I had no idea how to go about it, so I approached previous dis- sent award winners for their advice. I got a lot of responses. One stood out. “I spent many nights staring at my computer screen before I pressed send,” said one officer, remembering the weeks he spent imagining all the ways his career could blow up. “If I were you,” he said, “I probably wouldn’t do it.” And then he added, “But if you do do it, try not to sound like such a bleeding namby-pamby.” Bam. Another one, right on the chin. It was my first indication that dissent is not something the State Department takes lightly. In later days, as I approached various senior officers in Mission Mexico, I was aware of how their bodies tensed visibly at the idea of a new officer question- ing immigration law, or worse, the Bible of consular policy— the Foreign Affairs Manual. (Wince.) To me, this was perplexing. As a former journalist, I was accustomed to questioning the establishment. I soon found that the State Department is different. Here, dissenting voices are not received the same way as they would be in, say, the private sector, where out-of-the box thinking is valued because it can lead to innovation and profit. Here, dissenting voices are viewed as suspect, and possibly dangerous. I also realized that the Dissent Channel is really for officers who have no other recourse. Those who have pulled every lever and bent every ear, to no effect. For them, the Dissent Channel is their last card—the bullet train to the mothership. In the end, I didn’t need to use it, because I found a way to dissent fromwithin. Working from Within There are many ways to dissent. Here is what I did. 1. Choose your battle wisely. If you’re going to speak up, choose your issue carefully. I picked the one that rankled me most at the passport window. The one that felt unfair in my gut. And I knew it wasn’t just me. I heard it at lunchtime when other passport officers would do a post-mortem on their adjudica- tions. That small talk showed me how many officers feel frustrated at how this one particular aspect of immigration law seems to unfairly limit some people’s chances to become Americans. When I mentioned I’d like to speak up somehow, a fellow ELO jumped at the chance to do something and suggested we co-write a cable. And so we did. It was the beginning of everything. 2. Find a fertile management environment. We had the fortune to serve under two highly supportive managers. When we approached them, they both nodded their heads and said, “This bothers a lot of people. It could make a good cable.” One passed me a copy of the book The Dissent Papers (by Hannah Gurman) and carefully read every draft of our cable that we sent her. The other actively supported our efforts to lobby senior management to take this issue seriously. And senior management—particularly the CG, who in afternoons around the dirt field would coach me in the art of writing for the State Department—offered maxims like “Never As a former journalist, I was accustomed to questioning the establishment. I soon found that the State Department is different.