The Foreign Service Journal, September 2020

One reason I’m tapped to give these speeches is that I’m a 25-year veteran of the Foreign Service, and also a member of an endangered species: mid-level Hispanic FSOs. My agency is sincerely trying to recruit a more diverse workforce, but has con- sistently failed in terms of Hispanic representation since the late 1970s, when data on ethnicity began to be collected. A great deal of energy has gone into better recruitment, and those efforts should continue and be expanded. … But that needs to be accompanied by a broader effort—not only on behalf of Hispanics, but to benefit everyone at USAID—to cultivate a diverse Senior Management Group cadre. … If a quali- fied Hispanic (or other minority) has applied for an SMG position, there must be a compelling reason not to select that candidate. “I like this person more” is just not acceptable. —José Garzón, March 2014 TLG: Expanding Opportunities at State In 1973 WilliamB. Davis and Roburt Dumas, African-American employees of the U.S. Information Agency, became interested in identifying career paths for the advancement of African-American employees of USIA, State and other foreign affairs agencies. The duo organizedmeetings over lunch with likeminded African- American officers on the first Thursday of eachmonth, inspiring Davis to dub the organization the “Thursday Luncheon Group.” TLG, as the group is usually referred to, quickly began to focus on outreach to senior State Department officials, with the goal of advancing long-termpersonnel andmanagement goals. … Today, the informal mentoring programDavis and Dumas launched four decades ago has grown into a robust organization, comprising more than 300 active-duty Foreign Service officers and Civil Service employees, associate members and retired employees of the Department of State and the U.S. Agency for International Development. It is also the oldest of the 12 State Department employee affinity groups recognized by the Office of Civil Rights. —Stacy D. Williams, May 2013 The Issue of Race, Ethnicity Neither blacks nor other minorities made much headway in the Service until the U.S. civil rights movement swept the country in the mid-1960s. When that decade opened, only 17 of 3,732 FSOs were black. … The year 1964 was a turning point for blacks in the Foreign Service, culminating in the passage of the Civil Rights Act and a revised Foreign Service Act. A flurry of programs to recruit minorities into the Foreign Service would follow. President Jimmy Carter, backed by Secretary of State Cyrus Vance, was credited with increasing the number of black political appointees as ambassadors between 1977 and 1981. … During this period, [Terrence] Todman himself was named ambassador to Spain. Carter’s appointment of Andrew Young as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, the first time a black had been named to such a high-profile policymaking level in U.S. government, became an important milestone for minorities as well. During the Reagan administration, 11 black career diplomats were named as ambassadors. Fewer black ambassadors were appointed in the Bush administration, although black appointees fared better during Clinton’s first four years. —Francine Modderno, November 1996 The Case for Racial Diversity in the Foreign Service Diversity in America’s diplomatic service received its first official endorsement in the 1960s. Concerned with America’s image abroad, when the Soviet Union was com- peting with the United States in theThird World, President John Kennedy and Secre- tary of State Dean Rusk decided to increase the number of blacks in America’s diplomatic corps. … But there are stronger reasons than cosmetic for promoting diversity in America’s diplomatic corps. … Professionals of the foreign affairs community often complain that the Foreign Service and the State Department—unlike the agencies of Defense and Agriculture—do not have powerful con- stituencies in American society and in Congress. This handicap, which becomes especially painful when Congress takes up the foreign affairs budget, exists partially because many Americans, including some members of Congress, view the Foreign Service as elitist and irrelevant to the interests of the common person. This unflattering impression of the Foreign Service would change and the State Department would find it easier to earn badly needed congressional support if the Foreign Service reflected the diverse communities throughout the country and made fuller use of all members of the American family. —Kenneth Longmyer, May 1996 THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | SEPTEMBER 2020 49