The Foreign Service Journal, December 2018

24 DECEMBER 2018 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL One of the most important was that discipline depends on loyalty, and that loyalty only exists if it is two-way—from the top down as much as the other way. Those who try to demand loyalty without returning it deserve the disappointment they usually get. FSJ: What year did you take the Foreign Service Exam? What was the process like then? REN: I first took the written exam in 1965 (I think) and did not pass. I took it again the following year, more successfully. I don’t remember much about it. The oral seems to have been a bit more “free form” than what I hear described nowadays. FSJ: When did you join AFSA? REN: About two years after I became an FSO, as nearly as I remember. Initially, I had the idea that the Foreign Service would be a sort of mannerly club, so why did one need a union? I learned that while it is an impressive service it is also a bureau- cracy that sometimes doesn’t treat people with fairness. It took me about two years to figure this out, and I then joined AFSA. Your Career FSJ: Your first Foreign Service posting was to Senegal in 1971. Was that posting a good introduction to the Service for you? How? REN: Dakar was a great tour. I had six months as the only consular officer, and then became the only economic officer at post. Shortly after the change, the chargé in Bathurst (now Banjul) inThe Gambia died. His widow, in shock, couldn’t make up her mind whether to bury him inThe Gambia or send his remains back to the United States. It was summer in West Africa, Bathurst had no mortuary facilities, and a decision was needed. I ended up driving an undertaker and a coffin from Dakar and helping to seal up the coffin, and then was made chargé in Bathurst for three months until the department could find a properly senior officer to replace me. The post consisted of me and one local clerk, plus a driver and house staff. I was the admin officer, the cashier and the one to seal pouches and meet the courier at the airport. I also lob- bied the Gambian president for his United Nations vote, wrote the cable and encrypted it. There were no clearance issues at a one-person post! I spent a lot of time reading the Foreign Affairs Manual, and I learned a major amount about State Department regulations, administration and paperwork. In short, it was a superb introduction to all sorts of Foreign Service work. FSJ: You spent the bulk of your career in the Middle East. What made you decide to concentrate on that part of the world? REN: I had a 3 1 / 2 -month break between graduate school and reporting for the army. My wife and I stayed with my parents in Afghanistan and traveled all over the country. That was where I developed a strong interest in the Muslim world and decided to specialize in that part of the world. FSJ: What were some of the opportunities and challenges you encountered working in the Middle East? Are you optimistic about prospects for peace in that region? REN: I found many wonderful people and friends in the Middle East and Afghanistan. Radical Islam is contesting to set many areas back, and corruption and poor governance have given the radicals an opening; but many within Islamic society oppose them. These fluctuations need to be worked out within the countries themselves; and I say countries because, while the Islamic State or al-Qaida are transnational movements, the pushback against them and the societal solutions are national. I am not optimistic about Arab-Israeli peace, however. Nei- ther side has the leadership necessary. FSJ: If you could, please share your personal opinion on what the U.S. should be doing about the conflict in Yemen today, on the right U.S. approach to Iran and on the current U.S. approach to the Middle East. REN: These are giant issues that need more than sound-bite answers. On Yemen, we do need to push for a negotiated solu- tion, but Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are coun- tries that are important to us. I think it would be easier to wreck our relations than to force them to solutions they don’t want. So we’ll have to work very carefully with diplomacy, with some pressure, and with a great deal of realism. I disagreed with our withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal. Now we have a situation where each side is so suspicious of the other that any new negotiation is going to be even tougher than the last one; and that took years. I think I’ll stop there, because these issues really need discussion that is more nuanced than we have time for here. The ambassador, with the assistance of the country team, has a major role to advise on what will and won’t work and how to shape policy execution.