The Foreign Service Journal, September 2018

48 SEPTEMBER 2018 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL How Can the Foreign Service Remain Effective for the Next 60 Years? In 1984 the Journal asked a group of prominent individuals for their thoughts on the future of the Foreign Service. Here are excerpts from a selection of responses from the November 1984 FSJ . I can confirm your assumption that the Foreign Service is cur- rently effective in the development and implementation of U.S. foreign policy. As we face the future, however, the big question is whether the Foreign Service will evolve as dynamically as the international environment in which it operates. The key words for the future are high technology, multilateral- ism and economic interdependence. Bilateral relations will always be important; but most new problems overflow national boundar- ies and straddle domestic and international affairs. The complex issues of technology transfer, international debt and terrorism are current cases in point. FSOs should consider broadening their horizons as much as possible. Assignments outside areas of specialization, outside the department and, indeed, outside of government will be extremely valuable to officers who will face difficult issues in the high-tech, electronically fused world of 2000 and beyond. Increasingly, government will have to work closely with the pri- vate sector to achieve foreign policy objectives. The Foreign Ser- vice will have a unique role in bringing the best assets of both to bear on the continuous process of pursuing U.S. interests around the world. Foreign Service officers and specialists must expand their horizons to develop and maintain the necessary skills and intellectual mobility. —George P. Shultz, Secretary of State To remain effective for the next 60 years, the Foreign Service should strive to set ever higher standards of professionalism and dedication, and the Congress must encourage and help the Service in this quest. The Service must seek constantly to increase the number of officers who speak needed foreign languages. More emphasis must be placed on achieving higher language skill levels and on maintenance of those skills. The Service must recruit the best candidates—highly intelli- gent persons willing and able to serve under difficult and danger- ous conditions abroad. But we must be willing to pay what it costs to attract and keep them. The Service must deal with the professional interests of its members’ spouses. We do not want a Service of separated fami- lies—it would not be sustainable over the next 60 years or project adequately our American values of family and home. Finally, each administration must responsibly choose only well-qualified political appointees. There have been many superb political appointees named for high State Department and ambassadorial posts, but others have not had the background or experience for the job. The Foreign Service has problems, but they are manageable. I am sure that the Service will improve upon its already distinguished record of dedication and achievement over the next 60 years. —Charles H. Percy, chairman, Senate Foreign Relations Committee In the years ahead, the Foreign Service must adapt to major additions to the diplomatic agenda. Our record in this is not good. Our traditional view of diplomacy as essentially political did not prepare us to assume roles in development and informa- tion in the postwar years. Our inability to convince others of our dedication to trade lost us the commercial function. Political leaders’ doubts regarding our sensitivity to domestic currents have seen us bypassed in foreign policy. Already we have many new agenda items: arms control, transfer of high technology, allocation of radio frequencies. Others lie ahead in potential conflicts over transnational data flow, the availability of positions in space, the impact of outer space devel- opment on national sovereignty and the implications of biotech- nological innovations. The Foreign Service must begin to develop officers who understand technology and speak the language of the technicians. If not, others will replace us who can. Perhaps only after one has been out of the Service for a few years does the awareness dawn of how isolated the Service is, immersed in its own pressures, concentrating on other societies, and rooted in the protection of traditions and turf. Presidents and political leaders may not wait for such a traditional service to catch up. They will look elsewhere for the help they need. It is time for the Foreign Service to prepare itself to be responsive to the needs of the future. —David D. Newsom, former under secretary for political affairs One of the major recent changes affecting the Foreign Service is the heightened participation of Congress in foreign policymak- ing. I believe this trend will continue for the foreseeable future. In recent years, the Service’s isolation from the legislative domain has been breaking down. More and more mid-level