The Foreign Service Journal, October 2009

32 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / O C T O B E R 2 0 0 9 mined the budgets of field offices and wrote performance evaluations on PAOs (the ambassador wrote a second one). But after the merger each ambassador, who almost al- ways came from a non-PD cone, had a major say in the PAO’s budget, and he or she wrote the only performance evaluation that counted. Still Second-Class Citizens This unfortunate situation has been made worse by a notion that has become a mantra at State: “Every FSO should be a public diplomacy offi- cer.” That appealing idea would have great merit if it meant that every Foreign Service member truly under- stood and appreciated the value of PD work. Unfortunately, attitudes within State toward public diplomacy have not changed much in the decade since the merger. Regional assistant secretaries back in Wash- ington still see PD-cone officers as pegs to fill slots rather than as public diplomacy experts, while chiefs of mission and their deputies typically regard the PAO and other PD-cone officers at their embassy as utility shortstops available to do almost anything, whether it requires PD skills or not. Former Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy Karen Hughes asked all embassy officers to speak to the press more often, and many have done so. That is good, but public diplomacy involves much more than media inter- views. It encompasses long-term educational and cul- tural programming, and a mindset that is focused on creative ways to conduct a dialogue with foreign publics as an important tool serving American interests. That as- pect is not well understood. PAOs have a new problem, as well. Rather than head- ing an independent agency’s team, with a consolidated Washington office dedicated to backing them up, now they are just another staff position reporting only to the ambassador. And they have no defense against inappro- priate assignments that divert them from PD work, be- cause the under secretary for public diplomacy has no influence over PAO assignments To sum up, then: The 1999 merger destroyed what had been an efficient relationship in public diplomacy management between Washington and embassies abroad under USIA. And at the same time it failed to create what was in- tended to be a compensating ben- efit: more respect at State for public diplomacy and its practi- tioners. So, by and large, the old State Department attitude toward public diplomacy as a second-class function remains intact, although still unspoken. Adding insult to injury, State is filling many overseas public diplo- macy positions with FSOs who are not in the PD cone and have never done that kind of work before. (Regrettably, the under secretary for pub- lic diplomacy is not involved in those assignments.) An analysis by veteran public diplomacy professional Mike Canning found that as of January 2008, 127 of the nearly 600 public diplomacy positions at our embassies and con- sulates had gone to non-PD officers. At the same time, 226 of the PD-cone officers serving abroad were not in PD positions. In addition, the merger was supposed to open senior diplomatic positions to public diplomacy officers. A few more of them have become DCMs or ambassadors, but as the Public Diplomacy Advisory Commission’s 2008 re- port noted, public diplomacy officers are still “signifi- cantly under-represented in the seniormost ranks of department management.” PD Skills Are Different The main point that has been missed in all of this is that the effective PD practitioner has a very different mindset from other diplomats and an entirely different approach to the career. True, the skills of each type of diplomat in each cone are learned mostly on the job, working under more experienced senior officers who serve as role models. But PD work requires an interest in, and an understanding of, dealing with the general public, the media, universities and others in the local so- ciety — and doing so in the open. It also requires man- agement skills and the effective use of a large team of local employees, as well as good interpersonal skills. Political officers, by contrast, deal mostly with classi- fied matters, work with local officials and have little use for local employees or skills in management or public communication. To put it bluntly, most non-PD officers, F O C U S To protect and nurture the profession of public diplomacy, the Foreign Service should stop trying to make everyone a PD practitioner.