re: "Ten Things You Should Know About the State Department and USAID"

Thomas R. Nides, Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources, at DipNote ("U.S. Department of State Official Blog") had a good piece about things you likely don't know.

Money quote(s):

"Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates used to say that the Department of Defense has as many people in military bands as the State Department has in the Foreign Service."

The other sound bite factoid is that the DoD has more lawyers than the State Department has diplomats. I've never seen anyone even attempt to dispute either statement.

"2. We support American citizens abroad. In the past eight months, we provided emergency assistance to, or helped coordinate travel to safe locations for, American citizens in Japan, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Bahrain, and Cote d'Ivoire in the wake of natural disasters or civil unrest. Last year, we assisted in 11,000 international adoptions and worked on over 1,100 new child abduction cases -- resulting in the return of 485 American children."

I was going to follow this up with an excerpt from the State Department's "mission statement" that presents consular activities such as protecting-Americans-abroad as one of the core missions of the Department, but all I can currently find is some blather from the Bureau of Resource Management about "Shape and sustain a peaceful, prosperous, just, and democratic world and foster conditions for stability and progress for the benefit of the American people and people everywhere."

Huh? (Which is to say: OFFS! WTF?)

(Okay: where did the real mission statement go? I've seen it before.... )

At least CA still has a real mission statement:

"The mission of the Bureau of Consular Affairs (CA) is to protect the lives and interests of American citizens abroad and to strengthen the security of United States borders through the vigilant adjudication of visas and passports. CA contributes significantly to the USG goal of promoting international exchange and understanding. Our vision is to help American citizens engage the world. The Bureau issues the travel documents that allow Americans to travel the globe and lawful immigrants and visitors to travel to America and provides essential cycle of life services to American citizens overseas."

D/S Nides continued:

"9. We help Americans see the world. In 2010, we issued 14 million passports for Americans to travel abroad. We facilitate the lawful travel of students, tourists and business people, including issuing more than 700,000 visas for foreign students to study in the U.S. last year. And, if a storm could disrupt your vacation plans or if you could get sick from drinking the water, we alert you through our travel warnings."

Yeah. Stuff like that. Facilitate legitimate travel. Provide accurate and timely travel information and cautions. Get some.

"10. We are the face of America overseas. Our diplomats, development experts, and the programs they implement are the source of American leadership around the world. They are the embodiments of our American values abroad. They are a force for good in the world."

Development experts.... Sadly, D/S Nides' statement continues the conflation and assimilation of State and USAID. CAA remains wholly unconvinced that this is all that great a good idea.

That being said, U.S. diplomats serving at our far-flung embassies, consulate, and other missions abroad are often the first, if not the only, representatives of either/both the U.S. government or the American people who most non-Americans abroad will ever encounter in person.

And our powers should only be used for good.

D/S Nides concluded:

"All of this (and more) costs the American taxpayer about one percent of the overall federal budget. That is a small investment that yields a large return by advancing our national security, promoting our economic interests, and reaffirming our country's exceptional role in the world."

It's a truism (or "truthism") that most American citizens have a vast overestimation of just how much of the federal budget goes to either diplomacy or to foreign aid. Even when you throw in what the DoD spends or military aid, it's still a drop in the eye dropper compared to the rest of the "discretionary spending" and "entitlements."

(Oh, and this presumes that there is a budget, something which has not been true for several years now.)

8/26

re: "An Overfilled Heart: Usages And Abusages"

Francis W. Porretto at Eternity Road is laudatory towards Mark Steyn and assesses politicians and policies.

Money quote(s):

"They who go into politics are generally persons of weak conscience. Two centuries of the demotic incentive -- the need to please 50%-plus-one to gain or retain power -- have produced a sub-race of Mankind almost completely free of moral qualms. All that matters to them in any situation that requires a decision is the utterly pragmatic determination of the currently relevant constituency: just who those 50%-plus-one are to be "this time." " (Emphasis in original. - CAA)

"It has been clear since 732 Anno Domini that the Western world, once better described as Christendom, is at war with Islam. Clear, that is, to anyone with adequate knowledge of the dictates of Islam whose intellect isn't fettered to an irrational desire to appear "tolerant" and "inclusive." "

Mr. Porretto has this precisely reversed. Islam has been at war with Christendom, indeed with all its neighbors, since its inception. (It's hardwired into the programming, after all.)

"Denunciations of the assertion that Barack Hussein Obama is a Muslim have been widespread. Suffice it to say that we'd rather not believe that 53% of American voters did such a stupid thing. And perhaps, in the sense of having disclaimed the Shahada and accepted Christian baptism, Obama is at least formally not a Muslim. However, his behavior since his inauguration to the presidency speaks otherwise. At the very least, in any clash between Muslim and non-Muslim interests or sensibilities, he prefers to take their side against ours. He's even said so, publicly."

If you're of the opinion that having a Muslim father suffices to make one a Muslim (as many do believe), then that's going to be your opinion. If you're of a more Christian mindset, you believe (as I do) that an individual's professions of faith are what matters.

(Think of it as an extension of our Constitutional principle forbidding "corruption of blood.")

He concludes:

"Ugly language can be abused -- and abusive. However, as I've written before, there are times when nothing else will suffice. If we're not at such a point today, we're awfully damned close to one.

But at the ultimate cusp, the "WTF macro" will not suffice. Present trends in mealy-mouthed, insincere international diplomacy continuing, we'll soon reach a nexus at which the options will be two: to surrender to Islam, root and branch; or to "cowboy the fuck up!" and acknowledge the true dimensions of this war. At that point, no amount of profanity, however employed, will adequately describe the horrors before us. More, the longer we take to get to that nexus, the worse the sequel will be, no matter which course we choose to follow." (Emphasis in original. - CAA)

This is indeed the quandary. Was Pres. Bush (#43) correct in directing us to painstakingly avoid the very Clash of Civilizations that UBL wished to incite? Or is such a global conflagration inevitable, with delay only increasing the bloodshed, body count, and likelihood of victory.

These are the sorts of questions that serious people should be thinking and talking about, not this ridiculous "Wiener-gate" nonsense.