The Foreign Service Journal, September 2018

THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | SEPTEMBER 2018 49 FSOs have served in exchange programs with the Congress and have become directly involved in congressional testimony. This enhanced contact and communication between two branches of our government means that future FSOs will have to be more than researchers, drafters of cables and policy papers, and able nego- tiators: They will have to become effective advocates of executive policies and programs. Selection and promotion procedures should reflect this new and added requirement. Administrations, it is said, have varying programs and policies, but nations have permanent interests. The Foreign Service needs to develop public recognition of, and support for, its basic and continuing mission—which is to defend and promote the U.S. interest abroad, in the fullest sense of that term. — Dante B. Fascell, chairman, House Foreign Affairs Committee One thing is certain: if humanity survives on this planet, political structures and foreign affairs will still be moved by people acting and reacting with each other. This is what the Foreign Service is about. Our people are our only asset, and we must devote increas- ing attention to them. We must increase our capability to under- stand and anticipate the changes that science and technology are bringing to human relations in finance, economics, politics and military affairs so that we can be ahead of the curve instead of frantically trying to catch up. We must also better develop our domestic constituency to give our citizens and political leadership confidence that our objective is the protection and promotion of the interests of this country in their largest and best sense. If we are successful, we should regain that primacy in foreign affairs under the president to which we should aspire. —U. Alexis Johnson, former under secretary for political affairs The problem, as I see it, is not what the Foreign Service needs to do to remain an effective force in the next 60 years, but what the United States government needs to do to the Foreign Service to give it that possibility. This, in my opinion, would be to return to the sound principles of the Rogers Act of 1924: to make the For- eign Service—a highly selected and unashamedly elite body of professionals, held to high standards of discipline, performance and deportment, but respected accordingly—a self-administer- ing service, to be entered only at the bottom and by strict and impartial competitive examination. The Foreign Service should not be confused with the various bodies of technicians and specialists that are involved in other capacities in the external relations of our government, and it should be quite immune to political manipulation. It would be desirable that it be regarded as the normal and primary, though not exclusive, source of appointment to ambassadorial positions and to senior positions in the Department of State, these latter to include, incidentally, the position (yet to be established) of a permanent under secretary of state, on the British pattern, wholly divorced from political affiliation or influence. —George F. Kennan, retired ambassador The Foreign Service has only one asset—its people. To remain effective over the next 60 years, more work must be done to maintain the current high-quality FSO corps. In the face of declin- ing attractiveness of government as a career, the increasing role played by other agencies in foreign affairs, and the mounting per- sonal disadvantages in living overseas, the Foreign Service must run harder to stay even. Not only must we address such issues as pay, benefits, and working conditions, including greater oppor- tunities for working couples; but we must come to grips with the seemingly intractable obstacles to maximum performance during the last two decades: mission definition, a more rational alloca- tion of personnel resources, and an organizational structure that clarifies lines of accountability and responsibility. The good news is that foreign affairs is becoming more central to our country’s interests, indeed even its very survival. The presi- dent can and should look to the Foreign Service as his instrument to orchestrate our foreign policy resources. No recent president has fully accepted us in this role, but future presidents may find the need overwhelming. Let’s position ourselves to take advantage of the opportunity when it arises. The first priority is to get our own house in order. —Frank C. Carlucci, former FSO, chair, Commission on Assistance Train to Deal with the World As It Will Become The fundamental purpose of America’s foreign policy is to protect our citizens, our territory and our friends. As we look ahead, we know that increasingly, this will require an effective response to problems that extend far beyond our borders. To function successfully in this diverse, fast-paced and rapidly changing environment, we will need women and men trained to deal with the world not as it was, but as it is, and as it will become. We will need people who can find the needle of information that counts amidst the haystack of data that do not. We will need people who can function in partnership with those from elsewhere