The Foreign Service Journal, November 2004

B y the time you read this, the election will be over. The campaign season gave us a great opportunity to reflect on the role Foreign Service retirees can and shouldplay in national politics. Any AFSAmember will tell you that the U.S. role in the world should always loom large innational elections. Elections inother countries often turnon foreignpolicy issues. In contrast, they rarely do in the U.S. One major poll found in 1996 that 1 percent of Americans thought foreign policy was the key issue. The figure had risen to 3 percent in 2000. Another poll found that 5 percent were “basing their decisions” on foreign policy/security issues in 1996, and 12 percent in 2000. We all know— or least we’re repeatedly told— that what really mat- ters to U.S. voters is the economy. Things have beendifferent this year. The same two polling groups found that 38 to41percent of Americans in2004 think that international issues are the most important ones facing our country. What is the appropriateway formem- bers of the Foreign Service community to react when foreign policy issues that they’re involved in are debated publicly and politically? TheHatchAct sets clear limits for involvement by active-dutyper- sonnel in campaigns. Beyond that, pro- fessional ethics requires silence, or at least careful, non-partisan balance in any open commentary. After all, the mission of the Foreign Service is to carry out the law and to implement the president’s agenda in foreign relations, not to argue with him. In contrast, no such rules govern the many retiredmembers of the Foreign Service community. Several groups of former senior career officers went public with strong dissents on current issues. One group of retired officers signed on to an appeal to abol- ish the death penalty in the U.S. Another group put out a statement highly critical of the administration’s perceived favoritism toward Israel in Middle East peace matters. Focusingon the election, a thirdgroup, including anumber of retiredgenerals andadmi- rals as well as ambassadors, and calling itself Diplomats andMilitary Commanders for Change, issued a declaration in June sharply critical of the Bush administration. Although retiree dissenters reflect widespread concerns, their views were not unan- imous. One groupof retired ambassadors and flag-rankmilitary officers—Diplomats andMilitary Professionals forNational Security—offered a rejoinder in support of the Bushadministration’s foreignpolicies.Another enlisted formerRepublicanCabinetmem- bers to form a group called Diplomats for a Nonpartisan Foreign Service. However retiredmembers of the country’s ForeignService come downon the issues, it’s hard to imagine any of themnot welcoming the debate. There is no question about the need to brush up the U.S. image in the rest of the world. The fact that the coun- try’s leaders felt the need to address foreign affairs in some depth in their campaigns has been a small first step in the right direction. ▫ V.P. VOICE: RETIREES  BY GUEST COLUMNIST TED WILKINSON Foreign Affairs, Campaigns and Elections NOVEMBER 2004 • AFSA NEWS 5 Diplomatic Passports and Retirees In a letter to Under Secretary of State for Management Grant Green, and in a Sept. 9 meeting, AFSA President John Limbert let State management know that Foreign Service retirees are steaming over the decision to stop issuing diplomatic passports to retired chiefs of mission, except for those few holding the personal rank of career ambassador. AFSA has asked management to reconsider the decision. As Limbert stated in his letter, “The depth of feeling on this issue, although it affects only a relatively small group of retirees, cannot be overstated. Other than their pension, the diplomatic passport was the only privilege or recognition extended to those who reached the Service’s highest rank. Its abrupt withdrawal is regarded by many as a slap in the face, a questioning of the value of 30 or 40 years of distinguished service.” The under secretary explained that the courtesy diplomatic passport pro- gram had grown too large and includ- ed many people outside the Foreign Service. AFSA understands that some people have used their diplomatic passports for business trips, expressly prohibited. The program was nar- rowed significantly in December 2003 and now includes only former U.S. presidents, vice presidents, secretaries of State, career ambassadors (by rank) and their spouses/widow(er)s. AFSA NEWS BRIEFS The fact that the country’s leaders felt the need to address foreign affairs in some depth in their campaigns has been a small first step in the right direction. Briefs• Continued on page 7