The Foreign Service Journal, November 2020

THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | NOVEMBER 2020 95 officer, led at constant personal risk. Most compelling, and the center of this timely book, is her account of the evolving U.S. policy as Washington struggled to end the fighting and at the same time preserve the position of the Kiir government. Senior foreign policy leaders in Washington, notably including former National Security Adviser and U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice, were deter- mined not to preside over, much less allow, the dissolution of South Sudan, whose creation was seen as a great achievement for Washington and the international community. As a consequence, the Obama administration was unwilling to apply pressure on the Kiir government not- withstanding the atrocities it committed against its own people and even against international personnel. Shackelford makes clear that the reluctance to chal- lenge Kiir was in evidence prior to the beginning of hostilities. The administration consistently avoided confronting Kiir over wide- spread corruption and self-dealing, and in so doing, failed to use leverage it clearly possessed to press for real reform and peaceful resolution of grow- ing political tensions. Ultimately, Shackelford was driven to write a formal dissent message in May 2015. The State Department’s Foreign Affairs Manual describes the “dissent channel” as a means by which dissenting or alternative views on sub- stantive policy issues “can be expressed in a manner which ensures high-level review and response.” She details how her message was eventually swallowed by the State Department bureaucracy. The dissent channel is a risky step for FSOs that is used, as Shackelford explains, as a last resort by officers who perceive fundamental flaws in U.S. policy. The risk, she points out, is to an officer’s “corridor reputation”—a dissenting officer might be branded a “problem child.” In her detailed description of U.S. policy in South Sudan, Shackelford provides a thoughtful, and at times dev- astating, critique of American foreign policy across many administrations that have been unwilling to exert pressure on allies or more often client regimes. As she observes, the first casualty of such faintheartedness is usually human rights and democratic values. Ultimately, she concludes that “our human rights stance was all talk.” She cites the State Department’s mission statement: “To shape and sustain a peaceful, prosperous, just and demo- cratic world and foster conditions for stability and progress for the benefit of the American people and people everywhere,” but notes that early in the Trump administration that mission statement had changed, deleting the reference to “people everywhere,” along with “just” and “democratic.” Shackelford is not naive. In her final resignation letter, she notes: “I under- stand ... that we must balance compet- ing interests, but human rights and democracy are fundamental elements of a safer world for our people.” And in the end, she strikes a hope- ful note: “For all the mistakes we’ve made, and there are many, the world still recognizes something unique in the promise of America. It is still ours, Shackelford provides a thoughtful, and at times devastating, critique of American foreign policy across many administrations. if we choose it. I believe we can recover, but not simply by returning to a pre- Trump world. It will require a deliber- ate national discourse on what are the values that set us apart? ... How must we put them into practice?” The Dissent Channel is a remark- able book by a principled but realistic former Foreign Service officer. It should be required reading for foreign policy hands who hope to rebuild American diplomacy in a post-Trump era. It is especially important that State Depart- ment leaders recognize, as revealed in this book, the decades-old tendency to prioritize political convenience over allegiance to America’s fundamental values of human rights, democracy and honest governance. This book is recommended for families and friends of FSOs and for the American public more broadly, who seek to understand the life and work of America’s diplomats. Elizabeth Shack- elford is an outstanding example of the U.S. Foreign Service at its best. n Edmund McWilliams, a retired Senior Foreign Service officer, was political coun- selor in Jakarta from 1996 to 1999. Between 1975 and 2001, he opened and served in U.S. embassies in Bishkek and Dushanbe, and also served in Vientiane, Bangkok, Moscow, Kabul, Islamabad, Managua and Washington, D.C. Since retiring from the Service, he has volunteered with U.S. and foreign human rights nongovernmental organizations. He is the recipient of AFSA ’ s 1998 Herter Award for constructive dissent.