Politico - Tillerson looking to eliminate dozens of special envoy posts

Nahal Toosi at Politico ("We reach the most influential people in the country") did a nice piece of writing here.

Money quote(s):

"Tillerson notes that nearly 70 special envoy or similar positions exist at the department and that some have outlived their purpose. In many cases, Tillerson argues that existing State Department bureaus will be able to handle the same duties in a more efficient way."

Some of the special envoys duplicate offices or even U.S. ambassadors resident in other countries.

"Tillerson's attempts to reduce the number of special envoys has broad support within the State Department, where many diplomats nonetheless cringe at Trump's proposal to cut their budget by 30 percent. The general feeling is that the envoy positions have proliferated to the point where they are undermining existing State Department regional bureaus and other divisions that do similar work."

Yup.  And if eliminating those duplicative positions takes care of some of that 30 percent cut, it may save truly vital functions from getting the ax.

"Some of the special envoy positions are mandated by law, making Tillerson's reorganization process tricky. At the same time, many of the positions are supported by outside advocacy groups who fear that their elimination will undermine efforts to highlight those particular issues."

The articles cites "international labor affairs; cyber issues; rights for the disabled; implementation of the Iran nuclear deal; global youth issues; and the Northern Ireland conflict" specifically as special envoy positions to be eliminated.

Politico - State Department's No. 2 tries to buck up staff morale ahead of reorganization

Nahal Toosi at Politico ("We reach the most influential people in the country") spoke with two unnamed sources about a town-hall meeting held by the new deputy secstate.

Money quote(s):

"Sullivan also urged diplomats and other employees to take media reports on the department's woes with a grain of salt."

Ain't that the truth!  That might even have been one of CAA's very points on his own input to the employee survey, but with the point that the new management shouldn't believe everything it reads in the media about the Department and the people in it.

"When asked how seriously the Trump administration is taking a proposal that the State Department's consular services be transferred to the Department of Homeland Security,Sullivan indicated that the leadership at State intends to keep the division under its umbrella. He acknowledged, however, that all options remain on the table."

Well, he pretty much has to say that.  What would be the point of all the working groups and their recommendations if major decisions like these have already been made by top management?

re: "Ties that bind Defense, State"

Michael Clauser at Politico ("published every day that Congress is in session") get this mostly right.

Money quote(s):

"(A) key Washington budget debate: the proportionality of military spending relative to nonmilitary international affairs spending.

The U.S. spends roughly 20 cents of every tax dollar on defense, compared with slightly more than a penny for nonmilitary-related international affairs activities.

Advocates of soft power bemoan Washington’s overly militarized approach to the world, while conservatives are critical of what they view as an ineffective bureaucracy run by establishment elites in Foggy Bottom. Yet of all national budget debates, the fratricide for funds between State and Defense is most puzzling as their roles are so intrinsically complementary."

As Mr. Clauser notes, SecDef Gates didn't exactly take a parochial approach to this dichotomy. He knew that there were some things that the military shouldn't do, at least not in more than a supporting role.

"Deficit and debt reduction are necessary, but not sufficient, to ensure long-term U.S. strength and well-being. And the price should not be forfeiture of essential hard or soft U.S. national security capabilities or America’s leadership role in the world."

Usually we wait until a war is over before cashing in on a peace dividend. The Clinton administration crippled the military services doing this, while shrinking our diplomatic force multipliers just when they should have been growing them.

What' do you call doing this when the wars are still ongoing?

"U.S. leadership requires both hard and soft power working in concert.

The past 10 years of unconventional conflict have reminded the military and its congressional overseers of the inherently political nature of war and the importance of nonkinetic capabilities — like civil affairs teams, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, rule of law educators, development and reconstruction specialists, counter-drug personnel and police trainers. These capabilities are as vital to contemporary conflict as some major weapons systems. Cutting funding for them is, therefore, a kind of unilateral disarmament."

Preach it. "(U)nilateral disarmament." And he doesn't see that as a feature; be secure in your appreciation that it is indeed a bug.

USAID (and the former USIA) need to be re-established as more than contracting and out-sourcing entities, and as independent agencies. The stealth assimilation of USAID into State is just as bad an idea as absorbing USIA was.

"(F)ederal and nongovernmental aid groups are coming to realize how much they rely on the military to provide security for aid workers in pre-, post- and active conflict zones. Human rights watchers admit that the use of force, as in Libya, can stave off grave human rights atrocities. U.S. diplomats know that their ability to “speak softly” hinges on the presence of “a big stick.” " (Bold typeface added for emphasis. - CAA.)

Being a superpower means people return your calls in a timely manner. Which is nice.

They don't need to necessarily fear you, just respect that you're big enough that you can squash them by accident if you're not careful.

"Federal budget politics remain the quintessential zero-sum game. As Congress considers where to identify savings, it must acknowledge that defense, diplomacy and development cannot be devolved to state or local-level government. Instead, Congress should redirect its scalpel to departments and agencies whose missions are not as intrinsic to the federal government and to key drivers of long-term debt."

Yeah, good luck with that.

"Granted, this is far easier said than done.

With so many domestic political constituencies benefiting from federal programs in housing, health, education, labor, pensions and agriculture, it is all the more important for advocates of strong and balanced U.S. leadership in the world to work together — and work harder to be mutually reinforcing about the importance to each other’s roles."

Defense and State lack domestic constituencies for their missions except in time of war or international crisis, when American citizens are forced to look beyond their normal everyday lives to the wider world. And State lacks the big ticket items like large domestic bases, expensive procurement programs, and the like that make it a cash cow for legislators looking for a little pork.

Being a continental power that is in fact continent-wide, America is fortunate to be so large that for many of us the outside world is just so far away it hardly seems real. You just have to drive across too many states to even reach an international border for other countries to seem more than something you watch on National Geographic.

_____

Hat tip to the Editors at Small Wars Journal ("facilitates the exchange of information among practitioners, thought leaders, and students of Small Wars, in order to advance knowledge and capabilities in the field").

POLITICO - Senators speak out for Haitian orphans

From my archive of press clippings:

Politico

Senators speak out for Haitian orphans

By JAMES HOHMANN 1/27/10 4:41 AM EST

Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), eager to capitalize on the goodwill engendered by the month's earthquake, held a news conference with six other senators to push a bill that would create a new office in the State Department that coordinates adoption policy. Photo: AP

A bipartisan group of senators pushed Tuesday for the federal government to ease requirements for Americans to adopt Haitian orphans.

Read the whole article here.

Snippet(s):

"Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.), eager to capitalize on the goodwill engendered by the month’s earthquake, held a news conference with six other senators to push a bill that would create a new office in the State Department that coordinates adoption policy."

_____

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/32055.html#ixzz0dqr874nf