The Foreign Service Journal, December 2013

40 DECEMBER 2013 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL AFSA NEWS STATE VP VOICE | BY MATTHEW ASADA AFSA NEWS Views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the AFSA State VP. Contact: asadam@state.gov or (202) 647-8160 The Sept. 11, 2012 attack on our mission in Benghazi reminded us of the inherent dangers of our profession. The Benghazi Accountabil- ity and Review Board, its “Independent Panel” and the Office of the Inspector Gen- eral have all made recom- mendations on how to mini- mize future diplomatic loss of life. In addition, Congress is considering legislation that includes an embassy security component. However, to break the vicious cycle of attack, report and congressional action, we must ensure that this response includes a formal- ized process of evaluat- ing risks and rewards, and embraces enhanced lan- guage and security aware- ness training for Foreign Service employees. V i t a l Pr es en c e Va l i da t i on Pr o c es s In line with a basic busi- ness school lesson—that risks and rewards drive investment decisions— the department needs to introduce a similar diplo- matic security calculus. It is developing a Vital Presence Validation Process that will ultimately enable senior leadership to decide when the “rewards” (U.S. interests) are sufficiently high enough to bear additional “risks” (to U.S. diplomatic facilities and personnel.) The department, as an institution, may be more accepting of risk when Diplomatic Security 101: Risks and Rewards and where our interests are significant—during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, for example—but less so when our interests are not. That decision-making process will affect Foreign Service employees, who will ultimately bear any addi- tional unmitigated risk. AFSA, the exclusive representa- tive of the Foreign Service, looks forward to consulting with the department on this process. Such a risk-reward calculation is not new, to be sure. At an individual level, employees already make their own risk-reward calcula- tions based on quantifiable metrics, like danger pay, various incentive packages and Career Development Program considerations. Enhan c i ng Tr a i n i ng The department and its employees have a shared responsibility for personal security. The department invests in buildings, pro- grams and personnel to mini- mize and mitigate employee risk, but employees must also be security-conscious to avoid or escape threats. In the current fiscal cli- mate, the department should evaluate the effectiveness of competing training requests to maximize the return of its training dollars in these two areas: language and security awareness. While the department offers employee language training based on a position’s language designation (which is reviewed on a triennial basis), at present, there is no explicit personal security cri- terion to review when making such a determination (see 13 FAM 221.2). AFSA suggests includ- ing such a criterion, while encouraging bureaus and posts to consider more asymmetric language desig- nations. In many cases, 1+/0 language skills obtained via an FSI FAST language course may be sufficient enough for an FS employee to recognize and avoid threatening situa- tions. Post-Benghazi, the department expanded employee eligibility and increased the off-site length of its Foreign Affairs Coun- ter Threat course, OT 610 (known as “crash and bang”). However, participation in the course is limited by the capacity of the driving school in West Virginia. While AFSA supports the department’s long-term solu- tion to create a foreign affairs security training center, it may be able to increase its immediate training dollar return by examining the length, focus and venue of the current course. An irony of the “crash-and-bang” course was that many of its participants were headed to countries in which they were prohibited from driving. When I participated in the course, I was one of five For- eign Service employees out of the hundreds in Afghani- stan that could actually drive. Could the five days of student per diem and tuition be used more effectively and reach a larger audience if the FACT course had a different focus and venue? Se c r e t a r y Ke r r y, Ad vo ca t e Early in his tenure, Secretary of State John Kerry spoke of the “need for employees to engage with the world,” and not to “pull back” from diplomatic secu- rity challenges. He declared that U.S. Marines were overseas not just to protect classified material, but also the people producing and handling it. Since then, Sec. Kerry has demonstrated his willingness to address diplomatic security risks and rewards on multiple occa- sions. He is creating the envi- ronment for diplomatic engagement to flourish. For his efforts to fully succeed, the department needs to institutionalize this risk- reward process and enhance employee training. I look forward to hearing your ideas regarding security risk and reward at post. Next month: Occupy AFSA. n