The Foreign Service Journal, October 2006

zation of some 25,000 people and a multibillion-dollar budget. I would love to see the next candidate for Secretary of State ask the president to make the following changes as a con- dition to accepting the job. First, ensure that State has clear primacy in foreign relations over the National Security Council, Defense Department and the Department of Naval Intelligence. Second, give the Secretary of State the ability to veto all senior appoint- ments in the department. He or she cannot be held responsible for State’s role in the conduct of foreign affairs if nominal subordinates answer directly to the president, vice president, members of Congress or others. Third, the Department of State must be a serious instrument for con- ducting foreign relations, not a pool of ambassadorships and other presti- gious jobs for friends, party faithful and major campaign contributors. With some notable exceptions, non- career appointees do not possess the qualifications of foreign affairs pro- fessionals who have been rigorously selected, trained, assigned and pro- moted purely on merit during long careers in a keenly competitive up-or- out system. The best analogy is the armed services. Finally, our few “safe” embassies ought not to be reserved for political appointees. Such posts must instead be regarded as relief assignments for career professionals coming off the firing line of hardship posts, whose numbers continue to grow. Richard Dawson Jr. FSO, retired Uzes, France L E T T E R S O C T O B E R 2 0 0 6 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 9 Send your letters to: journal@afsa.org. Note that all letters are subject to editing for style, format and length.