BEYOND THE REDESIGN PRACTICING ENVIRONMENTAL DIPLOMACY PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN FOREIGN SERVICE ASSOCIATION SEPTEMBER 2018
THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | SEPTEMBER 2018 5 September 2018 Volume 95, No. 7 FOREIGN SERVICE Beyond the Redesign: Can State Deliver? 26 Blue-Ribbon Blues: Why So Many Great Reports and Good Ideas Go Nowhere Reform efforts at State are perennial. Several critical institutional issues have been studied again and again for decades to scant effect. Why is change so difficult? By Harry Kopp 33 You Have a Strategy. Now What? — How to Turn Any U.S. Mission Strategy into Results Today State has a unique opportunity to reassert leadership of foreign policy by focusing on delivering the outcomes promised by strategies that are now aligned across the department. By Matt Boland Feature 52 Practicing Environmental Diplomacy Early childhood experiences and a commitment to environmental stewardship served this diplomat well throughout his career. By Tom Armbruster Message from the Hill 15 A Foreign Service for America By Representative Joaquin Castro 39 E-Hell: Is There a Way Out? Efficient and secure information technology processes and platforms are the primary requirements for State’s operational modernization. Here is a candid look at the challenges and suggestions for a way forward. By Jay Anania 43 Who Is the Future of the Foreign Service? Career public servants at all levels and specialties make diplomacy work. How do we find them, keep them, grow them? By Barbara Bodine 47 The Future of the Foreign Service—As Seen Through the Years From the FSJ Archive.
6 SEPTEMBER 2018 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL 82 Local Lens Freetown, Sierra Leone By James Talalay 57 George F. Kennan Award Winner Announced 58 State VP Voice—Don’t Be a Heather 59 FCS VP Voice—Five Things I’ve Learned 60 Retiree VP Voice—Threats to Retirement Benefits 60 REA/WAE Coordinator Information: An Update 61 W here We Stand—The Power of High Expectations 62 AFSA on the Hill—Congressional Funding: The Long Game 62 AFSA President Attends USGLC Summit 63 Notes from LM—Implementation Dispute Settlement 63 Common Sense Guide to CODELs 64 Retiree Corner—The Results Are In: AFSA’s Retiree Survey 66 AFSA Welcomes New Retirement Benefits Counselor 66 Join the FSJ Centennial Celebration 67 2018 Scholarship Program Update 68 AFSA Welcomes New Governing Board Members 70 The Journal Welcomes New Editorial Board Members 71 Governing Board Meeting, June 20 71 AFSA Hosts Networking Happy Hour AFSA NEWS THE OFFICIAL RECORD OF THE AMERICAN FOREIGN SERVICE ASSOCIATION On the Cover—Art: “A Cubist State” by Josh Dorman Marketplace 74 Classifieds 76 Real Estate 78 Index to Advertisers FOREIGN SERVICE 7 President’s Views Covering the Bases By Barbara Stephenson 9 Letter from the Editor The State of State By Shawn Dorman 79 Reflections Being There: Camp David, 1978 By Frank Finver Perspectives Departments 10 Letters 13 Letters-Plus 17 Talking Points 72 Books 66
THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | SEPTEMBER 2018 7 ne of the best parts of summer is the chance I get to talk to—and hear from—so many members who are taking classes at FSI. If there is one thing that’s clear from talking to you, it’s that the Foreign Service team was never meant for the sidelines. The Foreign Service is chomping at the bit to get out on the field—to “the front lines, executing American diplomacy with great vigor and energy,” to borrow a phrase from Secretary Mike Pompeo. Getting adequate numbers of diplomats into the field is made harder by the erosion in funding for core diplomatic capability—down nearly a quarter from 2008. This erosion manifests itself in embassies that are short-staffed, with overstretched sections struggling to produce required reports and handle visits, and section chiefs lamenting the squeeze on time for mentoring and pursuing highimpact diplomacy. Meanwhile, back at home, Congress has been holding hearings about America losing ground to rising powers such as China. Alarm grows that Beijing, which has increased spending on diplomacy by 40 percent over the past five years, is gaining commercial, economic and, yes, political ground at the expense of America’s global leadership. These two trends are not unrelated. Reduce funding for America’s core diplomatic capability while China’s is increasing, and we should not be surprised if it looks like Beijing is running the bases on one continent after another while short-staffed American embassies struggle mightily to cover all the bases. While our defense spending outstrips the competition—more than 10 times what Russia spends, and more than the next eight countries combined—our spending on diplomacy is decidedly modest, with just $5 billion going to core diplomacy. If we care about maintaining America’s global leadership—and more than 90 percent of our fellow Americans say they do—it is simply not a good idea to leave second base and shortstop uncovered while China is at bat. If you will permit me to extend the baseball metaphor—it is the season, after all—during the past decade our country has devoted increasing levels of funding to building and securing the stadium (the embassy compound) while squeezing funding for the players needed to take the field and win the game. Luckily, we have highly skilled players ready—eager, even—to cover second base and shortstop, ready to step into the game. And luckily, Congress continues to vote to reject cuts to our funding; what’s more, for FY 2019, the Senate Committee on Appropriations voted 31-0 to begin to restore funding for core diplomatic capability, increasing funding for the “overseas programs” line item by $49 million. That may not be much money—less than half, by way of comparison, of the security bill for our consulate in Basra— but it’s enough to cover the overseas support costs for shifting 150 existing domestic mid-level positions overseas. It’s enough, in other words, to start to put the team back on the field. I was very encouraged to see support for getting more members of our team on the field from Brian Bulatao, who is awaiting confirmation as under secretary for management (M). In response to a question for the record from Senate Foreign Relations Committee member Ed Markey (D-Mass.) expressing support for deploying more Foreign Service officers overseas, M-designate Bulatao wrote: “If confirmed, I commit to supporting Secretary Pompeo’s field forward approach and will work with each respective Bureau to align our personnel and expertise against the Department’s most critical strategic priorities.” Bulatao went on to describe working with Congress “as we develop and implement plans to align additional State Department personnel overseas to advance the security and prosperity of all Americans.” This is good news for members of the Foreign Service eager for a chance to get in the game and prove their worth—and eager to advance the security and prosperity of all Americans. It is also great news for American business, which is calling for increased embassy staffing to help level the playing field so they can compete effectively overseas. And it is great news for the 90 percent of Americans who want to see our country retain global leadership. Here’s to covering all the bases. n Ambassador Barbara Stephenson is the president of the American Foreign Service Association. Covering the Bases BY BARBARA STEPHENSON O PRESIDENT’S VIEWS
8 SEPTEMBER 2018 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL Editor in Chief, Director of Publications Shawn Dorman: dorman@afsa.org Managing Editor Susan Brady Maitra: maitra@afsa.org Associate Editor Donna Gorman: gorman@afsa.org Publications Coordinator Dmitry Filipoff: filipoff@afsa.org Editorial Intern Jacob Borst: fsjedit@afsa.org Ad & Circulation Manager Allan Saunders: saunders@afsa.org David Bloom: bloom@afsa.org Art Director Caryn Suko Smith Editorial Board Alexis Ludwig, Chair James “Jim” Bever Fred Boll Angela Bond M. Allyn Brooks-LaSure Karen Brown Cleveland Shawn Kobb Harry Kopp John G. Rendeiro Jr. Priyadarshi “Pri” Sen Dinah Zeltser-Winant THE MAGAZINE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS PROFESSIONALS The Foreign Service Journal (ISSN 0146-3543), 2101 E Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20037-2990 is published monthly, with combined January-February and July-August issues, by the American Foreign Service Association (AFSA), a private, nonprofit organization. Material appearing herein represents the opinions of the writers and does not necessarily represent the views of the Journal, the Editorial Board or AFSA. Writer queries and submissions are invited, preferably by email. The Journal is not responsible for unsolicited manuscripts, photos or illustrations. Advertising inquiries are invited. All advertising is subject to the publisher’s approval. AFSA reserves the right to reject advertising that is not in keeping with its standards and objectives. The appearance of advertisements herein does not imply endorsement of goods or services offered. Opinions expressed in advertisements are the views of the advertisers and do not necessarily represent AFSA views or policy. Journal subscription: AFSA member–$20, included in annual dues; student–$30; institution–$40; others–$50; Single issue–$4.50. For foreign surface mail, add $18 per year; foreign airmail, $36 per year. Periodical postage paid at Washington, D.C., and at additional mailing offices. Indexed by the Public Affairs Information Services (PAIS). Email: journal@afsa.org Phone: (202) 338-4045 Fax: (202) 338-8244 Web: www.afsa.org/fsj © American Foreign Service Association, 2018 PRINTED IN THE U.S.A. Postmaster: Send address changes to AFSA, Attn: Address Change 2101 E Street NW Washington DC 20037-2990 AFSA Headquarters: (202) 338-4045; Fax (202) 338-6820 State Department AFSA Office: (202) 647-8160; Fax (202) 647-0265 USAID AFSA Office: (202) 712-1941; Fax (202) 216-3710 FCS AFSA Office: (202) 482-9088; Fax (202) 482-9087 GOVERNING BOARD President Hon. Barbara Stephenson: stephenson@afsa.org Secretary Hon. Tom Boyatt: tdboyatt@gmail.com Treasurer Hon. Earl Anthony “Tony” Wayne: WayneEA@gmail.com State Vice President Ken Kero-Mentz: keromentzka@state.gov USAID Vice President Jeff Levine: jlevine@usaid.gov FCS Vice President Daniel Crocker: Daniel.Crocker@trade.gov FAS Vice President Kimberly Svec Sawatzki: kim.sawatzki@usda.gov Retiree Vice President John K. Naland: nalandfamily@yahoo.com State Representatives Karen Brown Cleveland Don Jacobson Deborah Mennuti Roy Perrin Lilly Wahl-Tuco USAID Representative Vacant FCS Alternate Representative Lola Gulomova FAS Alternate Representative Thom Wright BBG Representative Steve Herman APHIS Representative Jeffery Austin Retiree Representatives Hon. Alphonse ‘Al’ La Porta Philip A. Shull STAFF Chief Operating Officer Russ Capps: capps@afsa.org Chief of Strategic Initiatives Linnea Gavrilis: gavrilis@afsa.org Executive Assistant to the President Jennie Orloff: orloff@afsa.org Office Coordinator Therese Thomas: therese@afsa.org ADVOCACY Director of Advocacy Kim Greenplate: greenplate@afsa.org BUSINESS DEPARTMENT Director of Finance and Facilities Femi Oshobukola: oshobukola@afsa.org Controller Kalpna Srimal: srimal@afsa.org Controller, Accounts Payable and Administration Cory Nishi: cnishi@afsa.org Administrative Assistant and Office Manager Ana Lopez: lopez@afsa.org Scholarships and Events Coordinator Theo Horn: horn@afsa.org COMMUNICATIONS AND MEMBERSHIP Director of Communications and Membership Ásgeir Sigfússon: sigfusson@afsa.org Online Communications Manager Jeff Lau: lau@afsa.org Communications and Marketing Manager Allan Saunders: saunders@afsa.org Awards Coordinator Perri Green: green@afsa.org Retiree Outreach Manager Christine Miele: miele@afsa.org Retirement Benefits Counselor Dolores Brown: brown@afsa.org Member Accounts Specialist Ashley Dunn: dunn@afsa.org LABOR MANAGEMENT General Counsel Sharon Papp: PappS@state.gov Deputy General Counsel Raeka Safai: SafaiR@state.gov Senior Staff Attorneys Neera Parikh: ParikhNA@state.gov Zlatana Badrich: BadrichZ@state.gov Labor Management Counselor Colleen Fallon-Lenaghan: FallonLenaghanC@state.gov Grievance Counselors Jason Snyder: SnyderJ@state.gov Heather Townsend: TownsendHA@state.gov Senior Labor Management Advisor James Yorke: YorkeJ@state.gov Labor Management Advisor Patrick Bradley: BradleyPG@state.gov USAID and FCS Staff Assistant Michael Wallace: WallaceMR2@state.gov PROFESSIONAL POLICY ISSUES Director of Professional Policy Issues Julie Nutter: nutter@afsa.org FOREIGN SERVICE CONTACTS www.afsa.org
THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | SEPTEMBER 2018 9 reform plan for this endlessly examined institution? What did we learn from the latest effort and the ones before that? Where does the State Department go from here? The focus this month, “Beyond the Redesign: Can State Deliver?” takes up this line of inquiry. In his “Blue-Ribbon Blues,” Harry Kopp looks back at 60 years of reform efforts and studies to try to understand why so many good (and some bad) ideas go nowhere. FSO Matt Boland presents a roadmap for effective strategic planning and implementation, arguing that U.S. missions already have the tools for getting to successful outcomes, they just need to pick them up and use them. Then in “E-Hell: Is There a Way Out?” Ambassador (ret.) Jay Anania, a former acting chief information officer for the department, lays out what’s wrong with State IT—the perennial topic to end all perennial topics—and how top-level sustained commitment could lead to significant improvements. Ambassador (ret.) Barbara Bodine, director of Georgetown’s Institute for the Study of Diplomacy, offers the view from campus on human capital with “Who Is the Future of the Foreign Service?” And, goodness, there was a lot to choose from the FSJ archive on reform and the future of the Foreign Service. The excerpts from LETTER FROM THE EDITOR The State of State BY SHAWN DORMAN It’s August 15 as I write this note, and I’ve just come back from hosting a table at lunch with the 194th A-100 class, a glorious group of 82 bright and shining Foreign Service officers. They had Flag Day last Friday and are busy reading up on the posts around the world they will call home for the next two years: Mumbai, Jakarta, Shanghai, Chengdu, Bishkek, Tijuana, Dar es Salaam… And just last week we got to welcome the 148th, a new class of 89 Foreign Service specialists. Foreign Service hiring has resumed, and not a moment too soon. There is diplomatic work to do, and the pipeline of new hires has finally started to flow again. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo lifted the hiring freeze on family member employment on his first day on the job, another good sign for the future of the Foreign Service. The loss of dozens of senior-level diplomats during the last 18 months— some of the best mentors for this next generation—will be felt for years. But the renewal has begun. The new A-100 class even named itself the “Resurgent 194th.” You won’t hear anyone utter the words “Redesign” or “Impact Initiative” in the halls of the State Department today. It’s as if that most recent reform project never happened. But as any observer of the state of State must ask, what was that? And what’s the next signature Shawn Dorman is the editor of The Foreign Service Journal. 1950 to 2015 are a reminder that there may, indeed, be nothing new under the sun. This month’s Message from the Hill comes from Representative Joaquin Castro (D-Texas), who calls for a strengthened Foreign Service and congressional support for greater investment in “rebuilding this venerable American institution” at a time of complex and growing challenges. Ambassador (ret.) Tom Armbruster takes us on an environmental diplomacy journey to the Marshall Islands. We then visit Camp David, circa 1978, with retired FSO Frank Finver as he helps out during peace talks that led to the signing of the Camp David Accords between Egypt and Israel—40 years ago this month. Finally, the discussion of support (and lack thereof) for FS children with special needs continues in Letters-Plus, with an inside look at what’s gone wrong in what former State child psychologist James Brush calls “The Demise of MED’s Child and Family Program.” As always, we want to hear from you, so please send letters to the editor and submissions on topics of current concern. And don’t forget to help celebrate the FSJ centennial by sharing (to journal@afsa.org) a photo of yourself or a friend with the Journal wherever you are. n What did we learn from the latest reform effort? Where does State go from here?
10 SEPTEMBER 2018 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL LETTERS Remembering the East Africa Bombings The July-August FSJ stirred memories. Reading about these bombings reminded me of the bombing of our embassy in Saigon in 1965. I was typing in the Communications Center and recall being surprised at how long the BOOM went on. When we hear bombings in movies, it’s just “boom” and it’s over. I put my head on my typewriter as did Miki Lovett, a co-worker. As I did so, I looked back and saw a flimsy wall between our distribution center and the file room coming down, with tons of debris behind it. We were lucky that a woman working in the file room had heard the shooting and raised the window of frosted glass to look out. Because of this we just had bits of glass flying around, not the big shards other offices had. Our supervisor had been standing in the door of the distribution room just before the blast, and I’d been talking to him. He made a dive for the “back room,” and the door was pitted with bits of glass. He was not hurt. The two women in the file room had some nasty scratches, and the one who’d looked out the window had some permanent damage to her eye. Other than a few miscellaneous scratches on the rest of us, we were unscathed. We immediately began cleaning up because we knew there’d be a lot of telegrams in and out for the rest of the day. Within just a few minutes another agency, USAID, called to tell us they had some missing telegrams. I told them I would appreciate it if they’d call later because the embassy was just bombed, and they laughed and said, “Oh, Judy, that’s funny—but here are the numbers.” I finally got them to realize it wasn’t a joke. It had been a long time since anyone had attacked a U.S. embassy. When Miki and I finally went for lunch, we automatically walked down the stairs. We could tell everyone else had, too, from the bloody handprints on the wall. I found out later that the elevator never stopped—in fact there was an employee in it when the bomb went off. It turned out that our building, very old, didn’t have steel beams but was put up using pressure. We had virtually no structural damage. Meanwhile, nearby stores and dwellings were demolished. I hate to think how many Vietnamese were killed. One young embassy employee was killed, Barbara Rollins, and a Merchant Marine walking outside the Consular section also died. So many of our staff had serious wounds, and some were flown to the Philippines for care. We considered ourselves lucky. After the bombing we were told that if we were in the building at the time of the bombing, we would have five days R&R, and if we were wounded, seven days. That was our therapy. Judy Chidester FSS, retired Las Cruces, New Mexico Keeping Up with Health Care I applaud AFSA State VP Ken KeroMentz for his column, “Deferred Maintenance,” in the July-August Journal. Scheduling those routine physical exams is good for your health, your pocketbook (because many health insurance plans already cover those visits), your family and your colleagues. Routine check-ups can identify an area of concern before it becomes a costly, emotionally taxing and possibly lifethreatening emergency. I’ve always appreciated it when my managers have encouraged their teammates to allocate the time for routine check-ups, because those signals create an environment for employees to do affordable preventive maintenance and take steps to heal themselves quickly when they do fall ill. It’s good for morale and it’s even better for productivity, because healthy employees are more likely to be effective. Scheduling routine check-ups at home and abroad is an important element of preventive health care. KeroMentz’s encouragement to tap into MED’s network of English-speaking doctors for preventive physical and mental health check-ups abroad is an excellent recommendation. It’s also important to consider designating a person who can advocate for your health care in case you fall ill or are injured. For most of us that is our spouse, but what if our spouse is not present at post when we are ill or injured? Moreover, what if one is single and does not have a spouse? Maintaining updated living wills, designating power of attorney and making these documents readily available during a health care emergency are important steps to ensure our personal health is maintained when we are unable to do it ourselves. To that end, I hope medical units will consider talking to newly arrived employees and their family members about the status and availability of their living wills and health care power of
12 SEPTEMBER 2018 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL attorney documents during the check-in process at post. Living abroad is hard, and a small nudge can enhance the preparedness of our community to respond to health care emergencies with efficiency, compassion and humanity. David S. Boxer FSO Arlington, Virginia Remembering a Russian Diplomat I enjoyed reading Phil Skotte’s May Speaking Out, “What State Should Bring to the Table: Cultural and Language Expertise.” Not only does he make a great case for regional specialization, but his anecdote about an unnamed Russian diplomat resonated deeply with me. As a fellow Embassy Moscow alum, I also had the opportunity to work with the diplomat Skotte is referring to—Ambassador Andrei Karlov, whose unmatched diplomatic experience in North Korea provided his U.S. counterparts at that time with fascinating background on working with and in the DPRK. He was a picture of professionalism and bilateral cooperation, and always enjoyed his high-level consular consultations in Washington and Moscow. Years later, on Dec. 19, 2016, Amb. Karlov was tragically assassinated in Ankara while serving as the Russian Federation’s ambassador to Turkey. Particularly now, I remember Andrei Karlov as a committed career diplomat who sought to build bridges between Russia and the United States, treating his counterparts with great respect even amid turbulent relations. RIP, Ambassador Karlov. Julie M. Stufft Deputy Chief of Mission Embassy Chisinau Ambassador Jon M. Huntsman: Foreign Service Leadership At first, I wasn’t certain what it was all about, my email queue bulging with messages from Foreign Service colleagues serving abroad and retired. Just one of them nicely sums up what all were feeling: “Ambassador Huntsman has done us proud! Welcome back, Foreign Service!” I hadn’t yet read the Salt Lake Tribune response from Huntsman to columnist Robert Gehrke’s call on him to resign as ambassador to Moscow given the controversy surrounding President Donald Trump’s July 16 meeting with Vladimir Putin. It was that reply, “Why I’m Staying,” that infused so much energy in my friends. Indeed, it was the kind of morale-booster the Foreign Service has needed for many years now. Amb. Huntsman’s response gives us all something to be proud of for a change. After such a long period of negativity, almost a “whole-of-government” effort against our president, finally we see something different. We see an ambassador who is not resigning, but instead speaks out on behalf of the president and the nation. He occupies one of the most important U.S. diplomatic posts in the world—Embassy Moscow—and tells us why it’s important that the Foreign Service stand up and stand tall when the going gets rough. Says Huntsman: “Representatives of our Foreign Service, Civil Service, military and intelligence services have neither the time nor inclination to obsess over politics, though the issues of the day are felt by all. Their focus is on the work that needs to be done to stabilize the most dangerous relationship in the world, one that encompasses nuclear weapons, fighting terrorism, stopping bloodshed in Ukraine and seeking a settlement of the seemingly intractable Syrian crisis. Their dedication to service to their country is above politics, and it inspires me to the core. It is my standard.” Adds Huntsman: “I have taken an unscientific survey among my colleagues, whom you reference, about whether I should resign. The laughter told me everything I needed to know.” As the ambassador says, the Foreign Service must remain above politics. We serve the flag. Our focus should be but one objective: abiding by the Constitution as chief foreign policy adviser to the commander-in-chief. This includes providing support to advance America’s security, strengthen its unity of purpose and make it an even greater nation. This is our institutional standard. To do anything less is to have failed. n Timothy C. Lawson Senior FSO, retired Hua Hin, Thailand Share your thoughts about this month’s issue. Submit letters to the editor: journal@afsa.org
THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | SEPTEMBER 2018 13 LETTERS-PLUS The Child and Family Program within the Bureau of Medical Services’ Mental Health program was constituted in 2013, when the full team was finally in place after years of planning. I was brought onto the team as one of two child psychologists. By March, we had on board a child psychiatrist director, two child psychologists and three clinical social workers who had experience in treating and managing the needs of children and adolescents. I was on the ground floor of this program, and our mission was both exciting and challenging. This was the first extensive effort within the State Department to support the specific mental health and developmental needs of children, adolescents and their families living abroad. We were to bring the various child welfare activities under one roof, allowing for a continuum of care for children and adolescents and their families. This meant that child mental health clearances, administration of the Special Needs Education Allowance (known as SNEA) and child medical evacuations for mental health reasons would be managed as a seamless activity. In addition, a new range of services was to be offered. We were provided telemedicine units and were charged with developing a telemedicine program offering clinical support to the medical providers around the world in U.S. missions. Because the mental health needs of children and adolescents are a specialty that few of MED’s providers have, the CFP was to offer guidance and support to those working “on the ground” with State Department families. We were also to develop a program of brief mental health consultation through the use of telemedicine. This type of support has been requested by families for years and is still very much needed. This program was not only to support families, but to try to reduce the medical evacuations of children and adolescents with behavioral health problems. The typical medical evacuation of a child or adolescent for a behavioral health problem lasts about six weeks, with evaluations and treatment taking place in the United States. And it usually involves a child or youth who has not been “on the radar” through the clearance system. In other words, the typical behavioral health medical evacuation is of a child or teen who has not previously been known to be having problems because child and teen behavioral health needs are usually not chronic and crop up because of life circumstances or trauma. Medical evacuations are extremely disruptive for families, often requiring family separation or entire families leaving post and temporarily relocating for evaluation and treatment of the child or teen and the family. It is also very disruptive to a mission, which often must do without an employee for an extended period of time. Further, medical evacuations are extremely expensive, when accounting for the costs of relocating and housing a child and perhaps an entire family, the evaluation costs and the treatment costs. The cost savings would occur from improved triage and brief treatment for those with conditions that can be easily resolved or supported at post. Examples of medical evacuations prevented by telemedicine consultation while we were piloting this program include a preschooler who had toileting probJames Brush, Ph.D., is a child and adolescent psychologist in private practice in Washington, D.C. He worked at the State Department as a child psychologist with the Child and Family Program division of MED Mental Health from January 2013 through March 2016. Prior to his work at State, he had a private practice in Cincinnati, Ohio, for 26 years. A past president of the Ohio Psychological Association, he continues to be involved as a committee chair. Response— The Demise of MED’s Child and Family Program BY JAMES BRUSH Here is another contribution to the discussion thread on support for Foreign Service children with special needs that began with the Speaking Out by Kathi Silva in March (“Families with Special Needs Kids Need Support”). The May FSJ contained a response from Dr. Charles Rosenfarb, medical director of State’s Bureau of Medical Services (“Our Commitment to Foreign Service Families”). Letters in the April, May and July-August editions added to the conversation.
14 SEPTEMBER 2018 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL lems and a school-aged child who had developed school phobia. I was involved in 10 consultations in our pilot program that were mild problems being considered for medical evacuation simply because there were no local treatment options. All the children and teens improved while maintaining the family at post. The Child and Family Program was also charged with tightening procedures in the administration of the SNEA program. The SNEA program had been inconsistently administered, and policies and procedures for SNEA had drifted from State Department rules and regulations and from the spirit of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 law and other disability laws on which it was based. Many parents were upset by changes in how SNEA was administered. The new CFP worked closely with the Office of Allowances to assure adherence to the policies and procedures governing SNEA and the Foreign Affairs Manual. We scrutinized services paid for by SNEA carefully and communicated more with financial management officers. Our goal was to include all stakeholders in the process, to be more transparent and to be more consistent in decision-making. Our hope was that in five years, a more comprehensive and robust program of support for children and families would be in place, with clear policies and procedures, so that families would find ample support from MED in taking care of the behavioral health and developmental needs of their children. We expected growing pains, and we expected there would be a need to educate employees about how to use the various programs being developed. We expected a lot of individual work with families to link them with needed services. We expected a need to request changes to SNEA and other processes that would need upper management direction. What we did not expect was suspicion and animosity from our State Department colleagues and many in the MED leadership. We thought everyone was on board with this new program. But we found that many MED psychiatrists, some members of the Office of Overseas Schools and some within the Family Liaison Office were prepared to torpedo the CFP from the start. I never understood the opposition to the program by members of the Office of Overseas Schools and the Family Liaison Office. We had been told when we began that the CFP was part of a strategic initiative developed by MED and upper State Department management that was intended to consolidate support services for Foreign Service children and their parents living abroad: the SNEA process, the child educational clearance and child mental health clearance process, and the medical evacuation process for children and teens. By 2015, three of the psychiatrists who were opposed to the CFP functioning as a comprehensive support program ended up having leadership roles in MED. Dr. Stephen Young took over as the director of mental health. Dr. Kathy Gallardo took over as deputy director of mental health, and Dr. Aleen Grabow was brought in as a child psychiatric consultant. Together, they worked toward limiting the scope of the CFP, limiting the SNEA program and reducing the opportunities for families with disabled children through more restrictive use of child mental health clearances. Within a year of their tenure in leadership, we lost our child psychiatrist director, the two child psychologists and one clinical social worker. I and the other providers left because Drs. Young and Gallardo changed the mission and scope of the CFP. It became an unpleasant place in which to work, with the emphasis being on clearances and restricting access to SNEA. Support for families was no longer the focus. Rather, support services were being cut and the clearance process was being used to restrict the opportunities of those with disabled children. The program is now a skeleton of what it was previously, with only one social worker, one child psychologist and one retired Foreign Service psychiatrist. Telemedicine is forbidden. The program now basically performs an administrative function, processing clearances and SNEA requests. This was a very sad, missed opportunity for the Department of State to support their employees with families abroad. I hope for the sake of State Department families that the idea of the Child and Family Program can be revived. But, if so, it will need fullthroated support from upper management so that it cannot be subverted by those with a different agenda. n This program was not only to support families, but to try to reduce the medical evacuations of children and adolescents with behavioral health problems.
THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | SEPTEMBER 2018 15 A MESSAGE FROM THE HILL A Foreign Service for America BY JOAQUIN CASTRO rom the rise of China, expanded Russian aggression with the invasion and occupation of Ukraine and meddling in the 2016 U.S. election, to the testing of our international institutions like NATO and the European Union, America needs swift diplomacy that adapts to the growing chorus of challenges we face. To leverage opportunities and stem conventional and unconventional threats, the United States must renew confidence in our leadership, diplomacy and values abroad. At the core of this effort is a strengthened Foreign Service that maintains American engagement with our allies and promotes diplomacy and development in all corners of the world. But during the last year and a half, we have seen flagging commitment to this important and strategic goal. The Trump administration attempted to cut our diplomacy and development agencies by nearly one-third, but Congress pushed back on that. Congress must restore our commitment to advancing American leadership abroad and equipping our diplomacy with the tools needed to best serve our interests. If we don’t, our Foreign Service officers—and our nation—will fall short in ensuring the prosperity and security of American ideals around the world. Since January 2017, the Trump administration has steadily attacked America’s diplomacy and development corps at the State Department and USAID. The hiring freeze, failure to appoint diplomats to critical positions, pushing senior diplomats out the door, alleged vetting of employees for loyalty to the president’s foreign policy agenda, consideration of offering $25,000 buyouts to seasoned professionals (until Congress objected) and a mismanaged “redesign” led by then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson caused long-lasting damage to the nation’s diplomatic abilities. The mass exodus of high-level employees crystalizes the current morale of the State Department, and this damage occurred at precisely the time we needed the expertise of our diplomats to address growing challenges. These cuts took place as North Korean missile tests flew over Japan, a country we are committed to defend by treaty; as the United States was called to mediate a dispute between Qatar and its Arab neighbors; as Beijing continued its assault on a rules-based order by expanding its presence in the South China Sea; and as a newly sworn-in president needed to articulate a professional, welldesigned foreign policy that maintained America’s voice on the world stage. Rebuilding Diplomacy We saw bipartisan pushback from Congress against the administration’s deep cuts to the State Department’s budget and workforce, and a mandate to restart A-100 classes and bring Foreign Service officers on board. We are now in the process of rebuilding this venerable American institution, which will require greater investment in core diplomatic capability, in our Foreign Service. If the administration and Secretary Mike Pompeo refuse to do so, Congress has a moral obligation to step in. These are our frontline civilians, and Congress must have the foresight to give them tools for success. If we don’t, we risk sending our sons and daughters into a much more dangerous situation than we see today. Unfortunately, we have been here before. The period after the end of the Cold War saw a drawdown at the State DepartJoaquin Castro (D-Texas) represents Texas’ 20th district (San Antonio) in the U.S. House of Representatives. Serving his third term, Rep. Castro sits on the House Intelligence and Foreign Affairs Committees and is first vice chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. Rep. Castro also serves as chief deputy whip and is a member of the Democratic Steering and Policy Committee. He is also founding co-chair of the Congressional Pre-K Caucus, the U.S.- Japan Caucus and the Congressional Caucus on ASEAN. Rep. Castro also hosts the foreign policy podcast Diplomatic Cable. F
16 SEPTEMBER 2018 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL ment, with a budget slashed and the U.S. presence abroad significantly reduced. Times were calm and money was tight, and we ultimately were forced to play catch-up after the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, forced the United States to engage with a wider range of partners and enemies. We called on an under-resourced Foreign Service to undertake new and expanded missions to ensure the security and prosperity of American citizens—including bureaucratic infighting. Long tours at hardship posts and a burst in hiring that disrupted the natural course of progression within the Foreign Service all strained our core diplomatic capability. While the current cuts to American diplomacy are not as extensive as what occurred two decades ago, the wise listen to history’s best lessons. We face new challenges today—from the looming threat of trade war that requires careful diplomacy and the prospect of dismantling Pyongyang’s nuclear capability, to hostile cyber activity that is below the threshold of all-out war. Any of these could escalate and necessitate a surge in diplomatic capability, as we needed on Sept. 12, 2001. The norms and institutions that govern our international world, carefully crafted and shaped over decades by members of the U.S. Foreign Service, are increasingly questioned by a rising China, a revisionist Russia and even some within the United States and allied nations. We also must be ready to confront the risks of cyberwarfare, as well as the benefits offered by economic engagement with dynamic regions like Southeast Asia or West Africa. A Foreign Service for the Future To invest in American diplomacy now, it is critical we strengthen the Foreign Service and our nation’s frontline civilians. This includes sending officers back to the field, restarting the consistent pipeline of new A-100 classes, and expanding training and educational opportunities to maintain and improve skills in a changing world. New challenges and opportunities demand this reinvention. We must invest in greater technical skills and defend the core values and mission of the Foreign Service. We must also expand the State Department’s mandate and resources in a budgetary environment where other departments may be better resourced to address challenges for which State should be the lead. This is also an opportunity to imagine what kind of Foreign Service the United States needs to meet the challenges and opportunities ahead. If we are to assuage the parts of our country that are losing faith in diplomacy and American leadership abroad, we must strive to make sure they are included in American diplomacy by expanding diversity in the Foreign Service. The Foreign Service must reflect the growing diversity of our country. I support and have acted to expand programs like the Rangel and Pickering fellowships that bring under-represented minorities into our Foreign Service through a highly selective program. I also commend the State Department’s practice of placing diplomats-in-residence in different parts of our country. We must do more to recruit from these under-represented states, cities, universities and communities. Only by giving Americans from all walks of life a direct say and participation in our country’s engagement with the rest of the world can we build a durable constituency at home for diplomacy and American global leadership. The United States must prepare for an uncertain future by innovating and supporting diplomacy. The Foreign Service has strong allies in Congress who recognize the need for a professional diplomatic corps that puts country over partisanship or politics. Congress will also need allies in the administration, academia and other parts of civil society to make our diplomacy more inclusive, more representative and, ultimately, more effective. We must adapt to meet the challenges we face today. We will legislate when necessary, for example, to allow FSOs to terminate costly contracts they enter before their service or to account for the latest technology in embassy and consular security policies—such as the Protecting American Diplomats from Surveillance Through Consumer Devices Act (H.R. 4989) that I introduced with Rep. Michael T. McCaul (R-Texas) and which passed the House of Representatives this year. We all have a duty—Democrats and Republicans alike—to ensure that our government, and specifically our Foreign Service, represents the best of our nation abroad. Conversations such as these help us define exactly what kind of country we wish to be. n The United States must prepare for an uncertain future by innovating and supporting diplomacy.
THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | SEPTEMBER 2018 17 TALKING POINTS Talking Points for U.S. Global Leadership Former Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Marc Grossman offered five “truths” to help explain to the American public why U.S. global leadership matters in a July 20 op-ed posted by YaleGlobal Online. “During almost three decades as a member of the U.S. Foreign Service, I was privileged to play a modest role in the design and nurturing of what many call the ‘liberal rules-based international order.’ Today, that order—created by Americans and our allies and friends and supported and upheld by U.S. military and diplomatic power—is under attack at home and abroad,” Grossman writes. “As a diplomat, I learned that how one describes things matters. The words ‘liberal rules-based international order’ mean nothing to 99 percent of the American public. …. The urgent challenge is to convince a larger audience that the international system the United States created and defended remains a crucial foundation of Americans’ wealth and power. “Those who believe that America remains a powerful force for good in the world must now make this case in new, more forceful ways. Instead of further exhortation to support the ‘liberal rulesbased international order,’ here are five ‘truths’ to use in public: “America’s global power and influence are good for Americans. Our economy grows and our country is safer when we have a strong military and strong diplomacy to keep and expand that power and influence. “America is more powerful and prosperous when there are clear rules and we set them. How many Americans want to live in a world where China or Russia sets the rules—or there are no rules at all? That’s what happens when America leaves a leadership vacuum. “America’s power and influence are multiplied when we work with other countries. We need likeminded friends and allies who can assume some of the burdens of global leadership and together solve problems that even the United States can’t manage alone. An isolated America is a less successful and secure America. “America is better off having more democracies in the world rather than more autocrats and dictators. A world growing in freedom is a world where Americans can advance U.S. interests and enjoy greater peace and prosperity. “Americans are richer when America is the world leader in the global economic system. Estimates are that more than 41 million U.S. jobs are connected to trade with other nations. American workers are not afraid of competition, so long as it is fair and provides benefits to all.” While the world grapples with ever-changing migration patterns, Vox Borders offers human stories from geographical and political borders around the world. The first season’s six short videos (each approximately 12 to 15 minutes) highlight some of the daily struggles at six borders, including Haiti-Dominican Republic, Mexico-Guatemala and Russia-Arctic. Vox journalist Johnny Harris went to each region to do on-the-ground research, bringing the border to the viewer with a video and a brief written introduction to the issues of the region. Says Harris: “Borders can encourage exchange or instigate violence. They can provide refuge, or they can criminalize those who cross them. Borders symbolize a nation’s anxiety about the world, and as political leaders regulate the lines on the map, there will always be human stories at the mercy of those choices.” The series shows viewers what life is like for residents of the border regions. In one episode, Vox shares the story of North Koreans living in Japan while remaining loyal to the North Korean regime. “This isn’t a story about a physical border,” the website notes. “North Koreans living in Japan experience a much less visible kind of border, one made of culture, tradition, history and ideology.” The show recently started its second season from Hong Kong, where producer Harris sought out locals to contribute ideas for places, stories and connections in the area. Season One episodes can be found at https://www.vox. com/a/borders. The first two episodes of season two can be found at Vox Borders on YouTube and Facebook. SITE OF THE MONTH: VOX BORDERS
18 SEPTEMBER 2018 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL Business Council Calls for Diplomatic Backup On June 26, the president of the Business Council for International Understanding, Peter Tichansky, sent a letter to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo urging him to put more diplomats in the field to help U.S. businesses compete worldwide. A nonpartisan organization with 200 member companies, BCIU aims to expand international trade and commerce by assisting its members to engage internationally. The letter states: “Since President Eisenhower established BCIU in 1955, we have worked to strengthen embassy effectiveness in leveling the playing field overseas—ensuring contracts are honored, improving government procurement processes and generally bolstering the rule of law so American companies can compete and win. “We have always counted on State Foreign Service officers, along with their Foreign Commercial Service counterparts, to bring the full weight of the embassies to bear when host governments or government-backed businesses fail to honor contracts or engage in back-room deals to unfairly cut out competition. “We agree with the president’s introduction to the National Security Strategy: the U.S. faces a dangerous and complex world, filled with a wide range of threats that have intensified in recent years. We see it every day in business—our companies face very sharp global competition, and our competitors often don’t always play by the same rules as we do. … “We need more backup, so we are writing to you to see if you would consider sending more diplomats to help level the playing field. We know that the American Foreign Service Association has been advocating putting more American diplomats in the field—shifting positions that are now in Washington to overseas embassies to fight for our businesses. BCIU would like to strongly endorse this common-sense idea. “Our members tell us that their private sector and government customers abroad want more American business, not less; more American investment, not less. They want reliability and quality, and they want businesses that operate fairly. American business can answer that demand, but to do so they need to be able to count on fully staffed embassies to help remove the impediments that keep them from doing business abroad. … “Mr. Secretary, we want to help you deliver on your vision, and that includes giving our companies every fair advantage around the world—including getting more of our diplomats in the field, working for American prosperity, our businesses and our values.” Facebook Live Event Goes Horribly Wrong Someone on the State Department’s social media team wasn’t thinking about the bigger picture when they decided to schedule a Facebook Live Q&A session on traveling with children overseas titled “Family Travel Hacks” on June 19—at the same time as the Trump administration was under fire for separating migrant families at the border and locking the children up in detention centers in an effort to deter people from trying to cross our southern border. Some 2,300 children were separated from their families. The event, moderated by the wellintentioned “Carl and Kim” from the Bureau of Consular Affairs, was meant to answer questions for U.S. citizen parents planning to travel abroad with their children this summer. A State Department official told The Hill that the campaign was part of a “seasonal outreach campaign,” but it came across as particularly tone-deaf. The moderators weren’t prepared for the onslaught of questions such as “When travelling can we pick which size cage we want our children to be jailed in?” and “I have a 4-month-old. What sort of work will he be prescribed when taken into the camp? His skills include rolling over,” and “While in your camp, will the children learn a trade...like picking veggies or digging ditches?”—along with hundreds of other comments like those posted to Facebook and Twitter ahead of and during the session. The administration backed off the practice of separating families following a June 26 court order requiring officials to stop detaining parents apart from minor children and to reunify those who have been separated. A federal judge in San Diego ruled that all families must be reunited within 30 days of that ruling and by July 10 if the children are younger than 5. These deadlines proved impossible to meet; as of mid-August, the government had reunited hundreds of children with parents, but it was still struggling to locate all parents and children who had been separated.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy ODIyMDU=