The Foreign Service Journal, October 2011

O C T O B E R 2 0 1 1 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 7 L ETTERS Courageous Diplomats Thank you for publishing Michael M. Uyehara’s excellent article on coura- geous diplomats (“Savior Diplomats: Finally Receiving Their Due,” July- August). Each of thosementioned, and others not included, deserve our grati- tude, even if belated, for standing on principle and doing the right thing, often at great personal cost. Harry Bingham, as previously recog- nized by AFSA, was one of the bravest and most self-effacing of those diplo- mats. His career took a nosedive as a consequence of his dissent, and he died in poverty, without ever revealing his role in saving more than 2,000 lives from the Nazis, many of them, but not all, Jews. Among those he saved was HeinrichMann, misidentified in the ar- ticle as a Jew. Joel J. Levy Senior FSO, retired New York, N.Y. Worthwhile Dissent The Journal is to be commended for its accounts of the State Department Dissent Channel in the July-August issue. Dissent is not only part of the American tradition, but has figured im- portantly in world history, as in Martin Luther’s “Here I stand; I cannot do oth- erwise,” which helped launch the Protestant Reformation. The appar- ently unique institutionalization of dis- sent in the State Department merits wider attention and utilization. Ambassador Tom Boyatt’s dissent, while serving as Cyprus desk officer, from official policy toward the ruling Greek junta did not seem to have a great effect on the policy, but also did not damage his career. The Dissent Channel is available to lower-level offi- cers, as well, and even without dis- cernible policy impact, it can be worth- while. My dissent memo of February 1977 concerning U.S. policy toward postwar Vietnam is a case in point. As an eco- nomic officer I had served in Vietnam three times: from 1952 to 1953, when the French were still there; in 1955, when the French had largely left but we had not yet come in; and from 1965 to 1967, during the height of our buildup. Back in Washington in the mid- 1970s, serving in the U.S. Agency for International Development’s Asia Bu- reau, I continued to follow develop- ments in Vietnam. Before the 1975 collapse of South Vietnam, I was in con- tact with the chief of the International Monetary Fund’s Southeast Asia Divi- sion. I was struck by his continuing to lead IMFmissions to Vietnam, much as before. Moreover, he reported to me that the Vietnamese officials he dealt with, while communists, were prag- matic, open to outside contacts and eager to avoid dependence on either side. It seemed to me that regardless of our post-defeat feelings about Vietnam, the U.S. interest lay in encouraging these liberalizing tendencies. After 20 years or so we were bound to establish relations with Vietnam anyway, as we had done with the People’s Republic of China. But a different view prevailed in the State Department. The U.S. voted against assistance to Vietnam by the In- ternational Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank. I had argued for it in the bureau andmy dissent memo spoke against the decision. In due course I received a response from the director of the Policy Planning Staff upholding the existing policy. Still, I had the satisfaction of having done what I could to rectify an error. Andmy prediction of the re-establishment of U.S.-Vietnam diplomatic relations 20 years after the war’s end turned out to be right on themoney: that decision was announced in July 1995. Theodore L. Lewis FSO and FSR, retired Germantown, Md. Pumping for the Future I would like to congratulate the FSJ for its May focus on work-life balance, and particularly for Elizabeth Power’s article on government agencies em-