The Foreign Service Journal, October 2007

OC T OB E R 2 0 0 7 / F OR E I GN S E R V I C E J OU R N A L 73 then separate into subgroups for advanced functional and area studies training, depending on their specific cone/special- ty and anticipated primary regional focus. The course could also have a communi- ty-service component permitting stu- dents to do volunteer work, such asmen- toring in local public schools. In addition to creating a course for all employees at about year four or five of ser- vice, State should continue to expand lan- guage training — especially for hard lan- guages in strategic regions, such as Arabic andChinese. For example, to ensureunin- terrupted language capabilities at one-year Arabicposts suchas those in IraqandSaudi Arabia, three officers are required: one at post, one in the first year of language train- ing, and one in the second year of train- ing. State could also expand non-FSI long- termtraining opportunities for employees between about years 12 to 17 of service. Examples include the variousU.S.military war colleges, university training anddevel- opmental details at nongovernmental organizations andwithinprivate industry. Currently, fewer than 75 Foreign Service members (mostly at the FS-2 and FS-1 grade levels) are given such opportunities each year—representing less than 3 per- cent of all mid-level employees. However, before additional long-term training opportunities could be created, another obstacle would need to be over- come: understaffing. The State Depart- ment is simply not staffed to permit addi- tional long-termprofessional training. The dilemma is summed up on the Web site of theU.S. Army’sCommand andGeneral Staff College at Ft. Leavenworth, Kansas: “We do not have interagency students in every classroom[because]…U.S. gov- ernmental agencies do not have the same robust training and education personnel accounts that themilitary services have to support a continuous professionalmilitary education that includes institutional edu- cation and training throughout anofficer’s career … U.S. governmental agencies wouldbe hamstrung to let their ‘front line’ subordinates attend a yearlong curriculum at CGSC. Unfortunately, these agencies tend to be ‘one deep’ in their manning.” Overcoming this “one deep” problem can only be achieved by creating a larger education and training float. For exam- ple, to permit all newly-tenured Foreign Service generalists and specialists to attend a nine-month “career course,” approxi- mately 600 student positions and 25 instructor positions would be required. Another 75 positions would be required inorder todouble thenumber ofmid-level employees in long-term training and developmental assignments. Another 200 slots could be dedicated to expanded long-term language training. Creating those 900 new positions would represent a huge step toward implementing the robust training float that Sec. Powell and others identified as necessary. Spare a DIME? Obviously, creating a large training float would cost a lot of money. But without a fully staffed and well-trained Foreign Service, the future will likely see, as the recent Senate report warned, “further encroachment of the military, by default, into areaswhere civilian leadership ismore appropriate.” That is something that no one, including the overstretched U.S. military, should want. In fact, U.S. military doctrine teaches that there are four elements of national power—diplomacy, intelligence,military and economics — with military force almost always being the last, not first, tool that should be employed to achieve national security goals. Thus, themilitary recognizes the value of a diplomatic corps that is sufficiently staffed and trained to enable it to, whenever possible, achieve national goals without necessitating mili- tary-led “kinetic” intervention. All of this argues for a rebalancing in the current 12:1 ratio ofmilitary spending to spending on diplomacy and foreign assistance. Instead, as things stand now, that imbalance is set toworsen. Consider the suggestion that 900 Foreign Service training positions be created. The U.S. Marine Corps alone—the smallest of the uniformed services— is slated to expand its active-duty ranks by 30 times as many (27,000) by 2011. The U.S. Army is slat- ed to add 65,000 more soldiers to its per- manent rolls. Thus, 900 new Foreign Service positions would amount to less than 1 percent of the planned military expansion—barely a rounding errorwhen compared to additional resources being dedicated to the Department of Defense which, for example, already has more musicians than the State Department has diplomats. But even if the administration and Congress were to fund a larger training float and a nine-month “career course,” there would still be a need for addition- al training at regular intervals through- out the employee’s career. One sugges- tion is to require supervisors at the begin- ning of each rated period to set a mini- mumnumber of days of training expect- ed of each employee to strengthen cur- rently needed skills or for general career development. This, of course, would be easier for D.C.-based employees to do than for overseas employees, but FSI could help by continuing to expand its online course offerings and its courses given at regional centers. The goal would be to make both managers and employees see education and training as an ongoing pro- fessional requirement that is a key towork force effectiveness. In conclusion, while America’s diplo- mats are receivingmore training than ever before, it is not nearly enough in view of the needs of 21st-centuryU.S. diplomacy. This underinvestment in Foreign Service education and training is contributing to anerosionof theDepartment of State’s role as the lead foreignaffairs agency. To reverse this trend, State needs the resources topro- vide Foreign Servicemembers the educa- tion and training necessary to equip them with the knowledge, skills and abilities that are essential to successful foreign policy development and implementation in the coming decades. John K. Naland, a 21-year veteran of the Foreign Service, is AFSA president. A F S A N E W S