In This Article
30-Second Summary
Headline Links: Diplomats may have no choice about serving in Iraq
Reactions: Town hall meeting stirs up emotions
History: A precedent for diplomatic dissent over Iraq
Key People: John Brady Kiesling
Opinion & Analysis: Examining the meaning of ‘worldwide service’
Reference Material: A day in the life of a diplomat
Subscribe to Politics Updates
State Department to Force Diplomats to Serve in Iraq
by
findingDulcinea Staff
The State Department plans an ultimatum for experienced Arabic-speaking diplomats reluctant to accept posts in Iraq: take the job or resign. Foreign service officers weigh career ambitions and duty against safety concerns for themselves and their families.
30-Second Summary
Anticipating a difficulty finding volunteers to fill posts in Iraq, the State Department announced on the week of Oct. 29 that if a personnel shortage arises, it will force diplomats to fill the vacant positions or to submit their resignations.
Between 200 and 300 diplomats are thought to have the target qualifications for 48 posts at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad and the provincial reconstruction teams in Iraq.
The proposed ultimatum, should it be imposed, will represent the largest diplomatic call-up of its kind since 1969, when State Department employees were reluctant to accept posts in Vietnam.
Foreign service officers decry the personnel move. One high-ranking diplomat claimed during an Oct. 31 town hall meeting in Washington that serving in Iraq is tantamount to “a death sentence.”
Other diplomats condemn such dissent, pointing out that a career with the foreign service means committing to worldwide availability, regardless of concerns for personal safety.
This is not the first wave of protest among diplomats over U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. In late 2002 and early 2003, during the lead-up to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, three top diplomats resigned because of their unease with the administration’s line.
According to The New York Times, “The reluctance of some foreign service employees to go to Iraq highlights a problem with the administration’s overall strategy for Iraq."
Between 200 and 300 diplomats are thought to have the target qualifications for 48 posts at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad and the provincial reconstruction teams in Iraq.
The proposed ultimatum, should it be imposed, will represent the largest diplomatic call-up of its kind since 1969, when State Department employees were reluctant to accept posts in Vietnam.
Foreign service officers decry the personnel move. One high-ranking diplomat claimed during an Oct. 31 town hall meeting in Washington that serving in Iraq is tantamount to “a death sentence.”
Other diplomats condemn such dissent, pointing out that a career with the foreign service means committing to worldwide availability, regardless of concerns for personal safety.
This is not the first wave of protest among diplomats over U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. In late 2002 and early 2003, during the lead-up to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, three top diplomats resigned because of their unease with the administration’s line.
According to The New York Times, “The reluctance of some foreign service employees to go to Iraq highlights a problem with the administration’s overall strategy for Iraq."
Headline Links: Diplomats may have no choice about serving in Iraq
During an hour-long town hall meeting on Oct. 31, several hundred U.S. diplomats voiced their frustration over what the State Department refers to as “called assignments” to Iraq. Between 200 and 300 employees have been identified as frontrunners to fill 48 open positions, should an insufficient number of employees volunteer. This would be the largest diplomatic call-up since the Vietnam War, and diplomats who refuse to report at the Iraqi posts assigned to them will be asked to resign. Jack Croddy, a senior foreign service officer, said to applause from colleagues, “I’m sorry, but basically [serving in Iraq is] a potential death sentence and you know it.” As of time of writing, no American diplomat has been killed in Iraq.
Source: ABC News
The State Department is preparing to draft diplomats with Arabic-language training to 48 posts at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad and with reconstruction teams in provincial Iraq, sparking outrage among the foreign service officer ranks and prompting top White House officials to go into damage control mode. Any diplomats who are summoned to posts in Iraq and refuse on grounds other than ill health or extreme hardship will be asked to resign. The New York Times writes, “The reluctance of some foreign service employees to go to Iraq highlights a problem with the administration’s overall strategy for Iraq. It calls on American diplomats to take challenges on a scale unmatched anywhere else in the world, at a time when the lack of security on the ground outside the Green Zone makes it one of the last places people, particularly those with families, want to go.”
Source: The New York Times
Reactions: Town hall meeting stirs up emotions
Debate over Service in Iraq Turns Bitter
The State Department’s decision to force foreign service officers into posts in Iraq that can’t be filled with volunteers has resulted in “diplomats taking decidedly undiplomatic potshots at one another,” according to The New York Times. John Matel, a diplomat working with a reconstruction team in the Iraqi province of al-Anbar, posted a quote from The New York Times on an official State Department blog saying that diplomats who are opposed to serving a tour in Iraq are “spoiled elitists whose revolt against so-called ‘directed assignments’ is embarrassing.” In a move to prevent intra-departmental strife, officials at State set up an “Iraq Staffing Working Group” to meet with employees identified as likely candidates for service in the war-torn country.
Source: The New York Times
John Matel is a career diplomat who is voluntarily serving at a post in provincial Iraq with a reconstruction team alongside Marines. While he is opposed to the idea of forced assignments, he writes that part of being a foreign service officer is being available to work anywhere in the world, including war zones. “All of us volunteered for this kind of work and we have enjoyed a pretty sweet lifestyle most of our careers,” he writes for Dipnote, the State Department’s official blog.
Source: Dipnote
History: A precedent for diplomatic dissent over Iraq
In February 2003, on the eve of the American-led invasion of Iraq, John Brady Kiesling met with the press office of the Greek Orthodox archbishop in Athens to plead with him to keep the church out of anti-war protests. "I thought it was a masterpiece of persuasive diplomacy—I guess hypocrisy is the only term. But the thing is, when you're saying it, you believe it," said Kiesling. A week later, regretting his earlier persuasiveness, he submitted his resignation, marking the end of a 20-year career. Two other senior diplomats stepped down after America invaded Iraq, Mary Ann Wright and John Brown. For Wright, who was posted at the U.S. Embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan, President George W. Bush’s “axis of evil” speech gave rise to her doubts as to the future of American foreign policy. “Why change the topic from al-Qaeda and Afghanistan when we're sitting right here in ground zero, so to speak, and we haven't solved this problem at all?" she asked.
Source: The Washington Post
Key People: John Brady Kiesling
John Brady Kiesling made international headlines in early 2003 for defecting from his senior-level foreign service post at the U.S. Embassy in Athens, Greece. His Web site includes a personal statement on why he stepped down, as well as links to articles he has since written.
Source: Brady Kiesling
Kiesling addressed his resignation letter to then-Secretary of State Colin Powell. Powell was not the sole recipient of the letter, however. In addition to State Department human resources staff, the letter found its way into the hands of newspaper pundits and eventually into e-mail inboxes the world over.
Source: Mother Jones
Opinion & Analysis: Examining the meaning of ‘worldwide service’
Henry S. Ensher, the director of political affairs for the Iraq office at the State Department’s headquarters in Washington D.C., writes that serving at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad should be the duty of any diplomat who has the appropriate skills. “There are short-term and long-term fixes to this issue. Over the long term, we have to make clear to current personnel and recruits that being ‘worldwide available’ means just that, and that all personnel should expect unaccompanied assignments in dangerous places in the course of a normal career.” His article appeared in Foreign Service Journal, a magazine published by the American Foreign service Association.
Source: Foreign Service Journal
Frank James, author of “The Swamp,” a blog running on the Chicago Tribune’s Web site, writes that the State Department is essentially telling diplomats with Arabic-language training and experience in the Middle East that “they should get over [forced assignments].” He responds to Ensher, writing, “You get the sense Ensher keeps a list of names in his computer of people he'd like to see shipped out immediately.” He also suggests that college graduates should keep the called assignments in the back of their mind when considering a career with the State Department.
Source: Chicago Tribune
Mark Kukis, Baghdad correspondent for Time magazine, writes that foreign service officers volunteering to serve in Iraq get a host of employment benefits, including a 70 percent pay differential on top of the standard salary, free housing for dependents in non-hardship locations and their pick of available destinations for their next post. Patricia Butenis, the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, says, “There are people who think it's constantly a barrage of mortar and rocket attacks. It's really not that way all the time."
Source: Time
Reference Material: A day in the life of a diplomat
The career and recruitment section of the State Department’s Web site has an online role-playing game called Assignment Abroad. Prospective diplomats can choose from two scenarios and five positions, and then navigate their way through the travails of working at an embassy.
Source: Department of State
© 2013 Dulcinea Media, Inc.
