The Foreign Service Journal, September 2019

24 SEPTEMBER 2019 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL 4. Realign Reporting Structures Human rights work requires creativity to measure progress against realistic bench- marks that resist easy quantification. It requires a commanding familiarity with the variety of tools at our disposal, rang- ing fromGlobal Magnitsky Act sanctions and human rights-related visa ineligibili- ties, to foreign assistance programs, U.S. anti-corruption laws that apply overseas, United Nations and regional human rights bodies and how to engage them, congres- sional certification requirements, human rights criteria for foreign military sales, and many others. For this reason, the officials best positioned to provide guidance and direc- tion to human rights officers in the field are the specialists in DRL, and reporting structures should be revised to recognize this reality. DRL should have responsibil- ity for filling field positions for human rights officers, who should then report to both the regional bureau and to DRL, which would share responsibility for drafting EERs. There is precedent for this reporting structure with the positions assigned to INL abroad. It is true that some positions abroad are already assigned, in theory, based on consultation between the regional bureau and DRL. In practice, however, the regional bureaus maintain full control of “consultative staffing” positions because they control the budgets funding them. Allocating DRL an equal share of the bud- get for these positions would increase the responsiveness of human rights officers in the field to the DRL experts in Wash- ington. Strengthening DRL’s oversight role for human rights positions abroad would create a virtuous cycle whereby DRL could help these officers performmore effectively, and the officers could sensitize DRL officials to the nuances of complex operating environments, enabling them to be more constructive in their guidance and assistance. This reformwould also make DRL headquarters assignments more attrac- tive to FSOs, who are naturally concerned about securing a desirable follow-on assignment abroad. Further, FS positions should be set aside in the Office of Global Program- ming, which manages democracy assistance grants fromWashington but currently has no FS billets. Posts often complain that USAID has personnel on the ground who can “de-conflict” duplica- tive assistance, whereas DRL efforts are overseen by absentee landlords. Setting aside FS program slots in GP would improve program coordination and alignment with embassy priorities. This would also provide FSOs with sought- after experience managing resources to demonstrate readiness for promotion. 5. Recognize That in the Long Term, Our Values and Our Interests Align Human rights diplomacy requires us to “challenge the old model that places security and human rights in opposite poles,” says Charles Blaha, the director of DRL’s Office of Security and Human Rights. “[A] growing body of experience and research demonstrates that rights- respecting, accountable security forces are more operationally effective against violent extremists, insurgents and trans- national criminal organizations” than forces that disregard human rights. Human rights diplomacy requires a nuanced understanding that, over the long term, our interests and our values converge. Governments that protect rights (including the property rights of U.S. investors) are our best trading part- ners, and democracies that derive their stability from popular legitimacy (includ- ing militaries that defend the nation rather than the ruling elite) are our most reliable military allies. Human rights officers need clout to push back against repression and rights abuses abroad, and also against argu- ments from others in our midst that put our values second to our interests, failing to recognize that over the long term, they are one and the same. Training and practice should focus on human rights as a complementary element to our various other priorities: human rights and economic develop- ment, human rights and environmental stewardship, and human rights and national security. That way, we reframe rights as an integral aspect of achieving other diplomatic goals—not a side gig or, worse, an impediment. With the return to great power competition, we need to draw a clear distinction with countries that do not share our values, such as China and Russia, by doubling down on our support for democracy to avoid repeating the mistakes we made during the Cold War. Emphasizing human rights will be essen- tial to strengthening American credibility and soft power around the world and reversing the rise of illiberal democracies that do not protect civil rights. The reforms outlined here will be important to strengthening U.S. diplo- macy for the challenges to come. n Speaking Out is the Journal ’s opinion forum, a place for lively discussion of issues affecting the U.S. Foreign Service and American diplomacy. The views expressed are those of the author; their publication here does not imply endorsement by the American Foreign Service Association.