Foreign Service Family

The latest figures I’ve seen show State Dept. as having 16,631 Civil Service (i.e., GS or “General Schedule” and Senior Executive Service or SES) employees, 44,764 Locally-Engaged Staff (i.e., what used to be called “Foreign Service Nationals,”) who are predominantly foreign nationals but also FS family members employed at our missions overseas, and only 13,636 Foreign Service staff members, including both Foreign Service Specialists (FSS) and “Generalists.”

The Foreign Service is a very small corps, overall.  It’s been said, truthfully, in this and other fora that there are more Army bandsmen than U.S. diplomats, more military lawyers in the Pentagon, &tc.

Looked at through the other end of the telescope, it’s also something of a very large extended family.  We’re pretty spread out, it’s true, but we get our orientation, language, and professional training in the same place, through the Foreign Service Institute (FSI) at Arlington Hall.  Then we work in widely dispersed locations around the world or across the country, oftentimes living in the same buildings or on the same residential compounds with our co-workers (with your kids going to the same schools) before winging back to D.C. to work at “Main State” in Foggy Bottom (near the GWU campus) or one of the various State Annex facilities scattered around Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia.

After awhile, the “degrees of separation” narrow down pretty far, so that if you don’t know someone in the Foreign Service personally, from having worked or trained with them, chances are pretty good that someone you have worked or trained with has worked or trained with them.  Or your spouse has.

So when something like Benghazi happens, where a senior foreign service officer/ambassador like Chris Stevens is killed, along with a long-time Information Management Officer (IMO) like Sean Smith and two of our contract employees, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, it hits home.  It’s like four of your fellow citizens in small hometown were suddenly murdered.

There’s a sudden and visceral impact, something like hearing of casualties from another military unit within the same division.  You might not have known them yourself, but you know you’ve walked the same hallways, sat in the same classrooms, and have similar missions facing similar dangers.

Another of those factoids that comes up from time to time is how there have been more ambassadors killed in the line of duty, since World War II, than general officers or admirals.  That remains true.

(One columnist or commenter, I forget where, voiced the criticism that if, in a decade of warfare, not a single general has been killed, our senior military leaders are leading from too far behind.)

Much of Main State emptied out, apparently, in order to be bused to Andrews AFB for attendance at a sort of ceremonial or memorial reception of the four caskets containing our fallen diplomats.   It was pretty well-attended, by all accounts, although marred somewhat by the behavior of those who simply had, in contravention of their instructions, to raise their arms in a sort of fascist salute as they took cell phone pictures.

(And don’t quibble with about whether our two ex-SEAL colleagues count as diplomats.  If they were part of our diplomatic mission in Libya, that’s good enough for me.)

re: "Showing contempt"

David Warren at DavidWarrenOnline ("Newspaper columns") wrote a column, the whole of which should be read.

Money quote(s):

"Perhaps we are all getting sick of the word "terrorism." The word is misused as if it represented an ideological faction, rather than a method for getting one's way; and at that, it is used evasively, to avoid naming one's enemy, which, under current strictures, counts as a faux pas." (Bold typeface added for emphasis. - CAA.)

Terrorism is a noun. It's not an enemy. Terrorism is how the U.S. was attacked on 9/11; terrorism isn't who attacked on 9/11.

"What the Iranian apostate Shia-Muslim revolutionary regime is accused of having plotted - an atrocity in a high-class Washington restaurant, whose focus would be the murder of the Saudi Arabian ambassador - was not exactly terrorism. It may never have been meant to work; it may have been meant to be discovered. In which case, it was pure diplomatic gesture, the meaning of which takes a moment to sink in." (Bold typeface added for emphasis. - CAA.)

It's basically flipping us (the U.S.) the bird, and doing it so the Saudis can't help but be forced to see it.

"We have to believe that Barack Obama's people are saner than Ali Khameini's people; or else, where would we be?"

By "people," our Canadian friend (Mr. Warren) seems to mean all of us in the federal departments and agencies, not just the White House or the Democratic Party.

(Which is quite correct, regardless of how individual civil (and foreign) servants may choose to vote.)

"Yet here was an unambiguous act of war, against both the U.S. and Saudi Arabia, that traces to Iran's "supreme leader" Khameini, according to State Department sources speaking anonymously but purposefully to the media. Perhaps not, they say, to the Islamic Republic's malicious clown of a president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (leaving an opening for one of their pet "Iranian factions" theories)." (Bold typeface added for emphasis. - CAA.)

As I read earlier today:

"the phrase "act of war" is really a political, rather than legal distinction."

Oh, and there are factions a-plenty in Iran, even within the Iranian government and power structure (which aren't quite congruent).

But evidence that any of these are particularly "moderate" (in Western terms) belongs primarily in the eyes of the beholders.

"(T)he U.S. is now showing the FBI evidence in foreign capitals; presumably to confirm what everyone long suspected: that Iran's leaders are (as we say in Persian) "Majnun."Unhinged they may be, but even a detached wooden door should understand the consequences of an unambiguous act of war. For that would be, war.

Did the Iranians think they wouldn't be caught, or did they think that, if caught, nothing would happen?

The first proposition is crazier than the second; for sad to say, "bad guys" all over the world have been learning that, since the last Stateside election, they can do anything they want to the U.S. with impunity. Unless, they are not actually heads of government, in which case they must watch out for drones." (Bold typeface added for emphasis. - CAA.)

This problem goes much further back than the last election; it ebbs and flows with the political vicissitudes. Even Pres. Reagan, he of sainted Conservative memory, isn't remembered for getting much in the way of payback for the Marine barracks bombing (Beirut 1983).

"When the ayatollahs learn that senior figures in their elite Quds force may be denied visas, I'm sure they laugh. They probably laughed harder when Susan Rice, America's UN ambassador, marched into their New York mission Wednesday to deliver a solemn letter. They know the U.S. has no leverage, short of military force, and that for the foreseeable future, force is off the table.

They even know that the U.S. military is about to be asset-stripped, when the current congressional budget-cutting exercise fails: for huge defence cuts automatically kick in when the Democrats decide they don't like the Republicans' alternatives. America has been quitting its thankless old job as "world policeman," with the whole world watching.

The greater risk is now being on the U.S. side, as the Saudis have been nervously discovering."

Denying visas to unsavory corruptocrats is a form of "soft power" that has legs in some parts of the world, but not-so-much in a country like Iran. And anybody who thought that it was a sort of "magic bullet" might consider tendering bids on a certain bridge.

"That Iran has international reach, through agents that can sometimes act competently, should be part of general knowledge. There is, for instance, an under-reported Argentine dimension of the plot."

Iran, or at least "factions" therein, has seen itself as the vanguard of a worldwide (Shia) Islamic revolution since their fundamentalist takeover in 1979. And parallels between their post-revolutionary behavior and that of the Bolsheviks are not accidental, they are deliberate, studied, and intentional. And that includes fielding a revolutionary "international" to do their dirty work abroad.

"(T)heir primary target was the Saudi ambassador. That is the key. The fact this mission was to be carried out on U.S. soil, was meant as a gesture of contempt for American power."

10/15

re: "How funny"

CAA (that's me!) continued his response to Jeff Emanuel's post at RedState:, responding to duncer's comment of Thursday, February 9th at 2:39 PM EST(link).
duncer said:

"Few people are aware of those numbers partly because outside of their immediate family, few people miss the diplomats. The generals are a real loss to the nation as are every enlisted man that has put himself in harms way for love of country,not a career behind a desk."

My response:

"How funny you think that diplomat’s don’t put themselves into harm’s way while serving the country they love."




2/9

re: "Dead Ambassadors"

CAA (that's me!) continued his response to Jeff Emanuel's post at RedState:, responding to snowshooze 's comment of Wednesday, February 8th (at 9:36PM EST (link).

snowshooze said:

"For all the good they have done, even that is too good.The United States should sent one Ambassador.He can talk the US line all by hisself. Hell, I would do it.And I would be glad to stay in a motel and fry my own eggs for breakfast.16,000… you hve got to be kidding me.That is an occupation."

Response:

"Since World War II, we’ve already had more U.S. ambassadors killed in the line of duty than generals and admirals.

Putting one into a Baghdad motel (assuming such a thing existed) is a spectacularly bad idea."

2/9

re: "Foreign Policy Technique"

Charles Crawford at Blogoir ("This website makes available to the general public interesting episodes and insights from Charles Crawford's eventful diplomatic career, and aims to explain in a open-minded, reasonable way how diplomacy works in practice.") tells you more of what you need to understand about diplomatic realities and engagement.

Money quote(s):

"Over at Commentator is my latest piece on UK engagement with Libya, in which I argue that what happened in recent years was principled, smart and mainly effective."

The following is a short passage from the longer excerpt he provided.

"there are only two basic choices available to democracies when it comes to dealing with odious regimes: Isolation, or Engagement. And that both can have perverse consequences, because it is impossible to deal with perverse regimes without some perverse outcomes"

Pithy, and to the point.

"(T)aking for granted that a 'Western' democratic system with a strong legal system is just 'better' than a cruel torturing dictatorship. What should the democracy do about the dictatorship?

One option is to do nothing. Faraway wicked foreigners oppress each other - what's new?

That option is in fact quite often used, even if there is a busy pretence of 'doing something'. Saudi Arabia is the classic example of a system which in most respects imposes odious unfair apartheid-like restrictions on its citizens, and which we studiously treat as a 'factor of stability'. Communist China used to be far worse, murdering millions. As did the USSR.

In all these cases the hard fact that these systems are powerful, ruthless and/or rich compels a certain caution. But does the fact that we 'tolerate' (say) the Saudi system demolish any claim by us to moral superiority? Double standards, they shriek.

No. Any good policy has to be realistic as well as consistent. If you can't stop all killers, it's right to stop those you can stop. To that extent there is solid intellectual and moral territory between 'double standards' and 'no standards'." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

You can only do what you can do; which doesn't mean you can't do anything, just that you can't do everything.

"The default position of Western democracies these days is that change should be 'peaceful'. The implication of this position (never discussed) is that enslaved people are better off if their slave-drivers reform slavery gradually, rather than get abruptly toppled even at the cost of many human lives. Slave-drivers need dialogue! A lot of dubious moral philosophy lurking behind that proposition.

What if we think that there are possibilities for more or less peaceful change? Egypt in some ways is a good current example. NB South Africa is always presented as a triumph for peaceful change but of course wasn't.

Libya might have been too, had the Gaddafi elite not reverted to stupidity instead of using its new improved relations with Western democracies to negotiate ." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

We tend to forget, at a distance of more than two centuries, just how bloody our own two revolutions (if you count the American Civil War as a second revolution, the one that liberated the rest of us) were. For the British, their bloody revolutions are even more distant, with less dramatic (to us) conclusions.

"In each individual case the options range far and wide, as does the prospect of getting allies and building successful coalitions for change.

Let's not forget too that Western political leaders' main focus is what their voters want. And voters (with rare exceptions) do not put changing the ways of revolting foreign regimes far up their priorities list. Or much taxpayers' money to be spent on the problem."

Some voters. Others are quite willing for their government to very meddlesome, with the treasure and blood coming from their fellow citizens.

"So in the real world of foreign policy it makes no sense to take a stark 'no compromise' position of substance with dictatorships. They exist, they have UN and other votes, they can export trouble, they probably have Ambassadors in London. Your aircraft may need to fly over their territory, or they may agree with you on various international technical issues. It's complicated.

You almost always end up with some form of 'engagement'. But the fact of matter-of-fact exchanges and opportunistically looking for areas to build some common ground is not the same thing as having a policy of Engagement aimed at deliberately using a range of options (openly or otherwise) to bring out reforms." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

In the real world, you make compromises. You make the best ones you can, but they're still compromises. Americans were cautioned early in their history against going abroad in search of dragons needing slaying.

Which doesn't mean you don't ever take fire and branch overseas to put an end to some odious regime which takes the ill-considered trouble of making themselves your enemy, just that you don't go looking for trouble.

(Which doesn't exactly jibe with this new-fangled "responsibility to protect" doctrine begin shopped around currently.)

"My point today is simple. British foreign policy and leadership can make positive changes in unpropitious foreign situations. But simply wanting to make a difference does not get results. Making that happen requires a powerful combination of strong policy determination, operational nimbleness and fine professional technique, an area where the FCO obviously declined under Labour. Plus some money." (Emphasis in original text. - CAA.)

Airbrush out the specifically British elements in that last and you've got some bood advice worthy of wide application by a democracy seeking to use its diplomatic strengths wisely and justly.

re: "Ambassadors for Atlantis"

Andrew Stuttaford at The Corner ("a web-leading source of real-time conservative opinion") relays a story that all diplomats should become familiar with.

What were the "Ambassadors for Atlantis":

"That’s the evocative term used in this post by Edward Lucas on the Economist’s Eastern Approaches blog to describe those exiled Baltic diplomats who flew the flag for their countries’ independendence throughout the long Soviet occupation"

Money quote:

"Sometimes, justice prevails."

From about 1933 until the end of the Cold War, there are some shining exemplars of diplomats and consuls who should be held as role models and heroes for the rest of us latecomers. The surviving diplomatic corps of the Baltic states provided a significant slice of them.

re: "Creeping competencies, or incompetent creeps?"

Melanie Phillips at The Spectator (UK) clearly believes this to be mere theatre.

Money quote(s):

"(T)he British government is shocked – shocked! – that the European Union’s foreign service is attempting to usurp the role and authority of British diplomats."

Not a bug. A feature.

"Foreign Secretary William Hague has ordered British ambassadors around the world to fight off what he believes are attempts by the EU foreign service to usurp their positions"

He's just now figuring this out?

I know that the British are even less likely than we Americans to put an actual professional diplomat in charge of their foreign ministry (we've done it precisely once), but one of the flaws of the Westminster parliamentary model is that it limits such appointments to elected politicians. At least in the U.S. we can cast a somewhat wider net than that for such appointments.

"What’s with the surprise all of a sudden? The thermonuclear row over the Lisbon Treaty, which enshrined the EU constitution and thus effectively created the EU Superstate of Bureaucratiya, was all about the fact that henceforth the EU would indeed speak on behalf of member states through its foreign service – indeed, that it would usurp virtually every self-governing function of Britain and other EU member states.

The whole point about the Lisbon Treaty was that it would finally destroy Britain as an independently governed country."

Not just Britain. The whole point of the "European Project" to the de-nationalization of Europe's nationalities. The aim or goal of the EU (and the "European Project" of which it is a phase) is to avoid a repeat of conflagrations and devastation brought to Europe by World Wars I & II.

As if the nationalism of, for instance, Monaco, Finland, San Marino, and Malta is as much a threat as that of Germany, Italy, and Russia was when their nationalism was harnessed to national socialism, fascism, and communism, respectively.

The logic, it fails me.

_____

Please visit Melanie Phillips at her new home.

re: "Protests here, there and everywhere and the US Government shutdown looms large"

Domani Spero at DiploPundit ("Just one obsessive observer, diplomatic watcher, opinionator and noodle newsmaker monitoring the goings on at Foggy Bottom and the worldwide available universe") has an extremely informative post about federal government shutdowns.

Money quote(s):

"The most recent one occurred in FY1996 for five days between November 13-19, 1995. The second one also in FY1996 was the longest in history, and lasted 21 days between December 15, 1995 - January 6, 1996.

Of course, as soon as the second government shutdown was lifted, the blizzard of 1996, a severe nor'easter arrived and paralyzed the entire East Coast with up to 4 feet of wind-driven snow. Remember that? A big mess all around, and not just the snow, most of it dumped on the GOP lawn."

I remember it well, working at the time as a government contractor. Since my contract remained funded, I continued working during the shutdown, but nearly all of my federal co-workers (I was working "on site" at a departmental headquarters in D.C.) weren't there. It was spooky.

To really enhance the fun, about 50 percent of my reserve battalion was being mobilized during that time period to deploy to Europe as part of Operation Joint Endeavor. Being snowed in (it took them most of a week for the snowplows to reach my apartment parking lot, and then an entire day for me to re-unentomb my car so I could get myself, uniforms, and gear to the reserve center that night) sucked.

"Potentially, all US embassies and consulates will also shutdown if the continuing funding resolution is not extended before Friday, March 4 at 11:59 pm. Since ambassadors are presidential appointees, they will presumably continue working. I suspect that most of the embassy staff will be sent home. Think you might volunteer your service for free to Uncle Sam? Think again. Not possible. "Unless otherwise authorized by law, an agency may not accept the voluntary services of an individual." (31 U.S.C. 1342). Read more here.

US missions will not be able to pay local bills for water, phone, electricity, sewer and other services for the chancery, and all USG properties. Hopefully, your management section already has an excellent working relationship with these service providers and none will cut off essential services to the embassy or embassy housing.

In 1995, all visa applications are walk-in. Today, a good number of consular sections have online appointment systems. Which means, visa appointments will have to be canceled and rescheduled if there is a shutdown. Consular sections may only be open for life and death emergencies. That means lost passport applications, reports of births abroad, adoption cases, notarials, etc. will all have to wait until the Federal government reopens.

Large scale evacuations of US embassy staff and US citizens in whatever is the next domino to fall -- would that be considered "essential?" Don't know if evacuees will be allowed government loans during the shutdown. Don't know what happens if you are on evacuation status in the safehaven destination or back in the US when the government shuts down. Best check with official folks to get answers before window closes for official business.

Members of Congress are exempt from the shutdown furloughs (and will continue to get their paychecks, of course). This means you might still see a CODEL visit in popular destinations like Kabul or Baghdad amidst a federal shutdown. Of course, there won't technically be embassy cars/drivers or control officers for those visits."

Control officers? Where have I heard that term before?

re: "The downside to better information-sharing: the human factor aka rotten apple with a security clearance"

Domani Spero at Diplopundit ("Just one obsessive observer, diplomatic watcher, opinionator and noodle newsmaker monitoring the goings on at Foggy Bottom and the worldwide available universe") continues to share her excellent perspective.

Money quote(s):

" (I)t has been reported that Hillary Clinton has "ordered" FSOs to spy on diplomats in the UN, because see there's a cable out there with her name at the bottom.

Ughh! Are they saying that she wrote all those cables that have her name on it? Really? But ALL cables coming out of the State Department when the Secretary of State is not traveling will have "CLINTON" as sign-off signature, approved through multiple layers of the alphabet soup, functional and regional bureaus, etc. She does not actually write them, dudes. And when she is traveling, the sign-off signature changes to whoever is in charge of the building, like "STEINBERG" or "BURNS" (since new D/MR "NIDES" has not been confirmed yet).Yes, that building has a life of its own.

The same is true with the embassy cables. The leaked cables were the transmitted ones; they usually do not include the names of the writers. And like the State Department cables, they all have the embassies' chiefs of missions in the sign-off lines. Does it mean the ambassador is XYZ country wrote all those cables? Goodness, no! Would they be able to go anywhere else or do anything else if they were all tied to their desks?"

"We suspect that this leak will have several repercussions on process, access and and more, and most probably for the short term, make the embassy reporting jobs more difficult than they already are"

&

"Former diplomat and Wilson Center scholar Aaron Miller writes that "The republic will survive the WikiLeaks brouhaha; but there's a lesson here for all of us: whether you're in Washington or Kabul, think and think hard before you draft." We agree about the survival of the republic but -- do we really want our diplomats to be more politically correct than be brutally candid when reporting to our policy makers? What used would that be to our decision makers?

And here the cables are called "insulting [to] world leaders." You should read what foreign diplomats wrote about George W. and our congressional leaders. Oh, right, you can't -- those are all in secret diplomatic channels going overseas, too."

JG - Fond farewell for Panamanian ambassador

From my archive of press clippings:

Jamaica Gleaner

Fond farewell for Panamanian ambassador

Published: Sunday April 12, 2009

Perhaps counting down the days to his departure, Panamanian Ambassador Ricardo Moreno (left) hobnobs with Brazilian Ambassador Alexander Gueiros (right) and Luz Santamaria. - Photos by Peta-Gaye Clachar/Staff Photographer


You know that you've been a great friend and comrade when the people who know you jostle to throw you a party.



That's how Ambassador of Panama Ricardo Moreno must feel after some of his colleagues threw an informal farewell party for him on Thursday, April 2. Ambassador Moreno explained that because he was not a career diplomat (but rather a political appointee), his term ends when there's a change of government. A new president will be sworn in by July so he will have to leave his post. So, if it seems that this farewell is a little premature, it's because Dominican Republic Ambassador Filomena Navarro wanted to be the first to throw a farewell for her "best friend".

Read the whole article here.

NYT - U.S. Envoy Is Cleared of Fraud on Chinese Arms

From my archive of press clippings:

New York Times

U.S. Envoy Is Cleared of Fraud on Chinese Arms


By ERIC SCHMITT


Published: March 18, 2009


WASHINGTON — The United States ambassador to Albania has been cleared of allegations that he helped cover up the illegal Chinese origins of ammunition that a Pentagon contractor bought to supply Afghan security forces, the State Department said Wednesday.

Read the whole article here.

Snippet(s):

"Last year, a military attaché at the embassy told investigators from the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform that the ambassador, John L. Withers II, endorsed a plan by the Albanian defense minister to hide several boxes of Chinese ammunition from a visiting reporter. The ammunition was being repackaged to disguise its origins and shipped from Albania to Afghanistan by a Miami Beach arms-dealing company, AEY Inc.

Mr. Withers, a Foreign Service officer for 25 years, adamantly denied the account of the attaché, Maj. Larry D. Harrison II, and said he and other embassy personnel worked closely with federal investigators looking into military procurement fraud."

S&S - Envoy: Rape case shouldn’t affect Philippines agreement

Stars and Stripes



Envoy: Rape case shouldn’t affect Philippines agreement


By David Allen, Stars and Stripes

Pacific edition, Sunday, March 29, 2009


The U.S. ambassador to the Philippines does not believe the Daniel Smith rape case will affect the Visiting Forces Agreement with the Philippines.

Read the whole article here.

Snippet(s):

"In a statement reported by media in Manila on Wednesday, Ambassador Kristie Kenney said negotiations regarding where the Marine lance corporal should be held pending his appeal of his December 2006 conviction should not result in any changes to the entire agreement.

The Philippines Supreme Court ruled last month that Smith, who is being held on the grounds of the U.S. Embassy in Manila pending his appeal, should have been remanded to a Philippines jail. The court ruled the agreement allowing Smith’s transfer to the embassy compound did not follow the guidelines set forth in the bilateral Visiting Forces Agreement, known as the VFA."

&

"On March 12, the 25-year-old woman who testified during the trial that Smith raped her, signed an affidavit stating she now doubts Smith actually raped her.

The woman, known publicly as "Nicole," has since moved to the U.S. with her American boyfriend, according to statements made by her mother."

SPS - Ambassador and Travel Agents tour SP

From my archive of press clippings:

San Pedro Sun

Ambassador and Travel Agents tour SP

June 26, 2008

On June 16th, 2008 Ambassador of Iran, His Excellency Doctor Mohammad Hassan Ghadiri Abyaneh presented his credentials to Governor General Sir Colville Young. At his presentation, Honorable Abyaneh extended warm greetings from his country and assured Sir Colville of greater development exchanges between both countries. The Iranian Ambassador resides in Mexico City and represents Mexico, Guatemala and Belize. During his visit to the country, His Excellency also took the opportunity to visit Ambergris Caye and discovered why everyone falls in love with the country.

Read the whole article here.

Snippet(s):

"As Ambassador of Iran to Belize, His Excellency plans on sharing technology and knowledge with Belizean counterparts in an effort to better the country.

Iran has invested much money in the United States of America and it is the hopes that the same can be accomplished in Belize."

&

"In the entire country of Belize there are five or six families or a total of 15 individuals from Iran."

S&S - Obama nominates ambassadors to Iraq and Afghanistan

Stars and Stripes



Obama nominates ambassadors to Iraq and Afghanistan

Stars and Stripes


European edition, Friday, March 13, 2009


WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama on Wednesday nominated Lt. Gen. Karl Eikenberry as ambassador to Afghanistan and Christopher Hill as ambassador to Iraq.

Read the whole article here.

re: "Chas Freeman and John Bolton"

Charles at Undiplomatic ("dedicated to covering the intersection of diplomacy, global issues, U.S. politics, and pop-culture") contrasts the nominations of two former ambassadors.

Money quote(s):

"(T)here has been quite a storm brewing over President Obama’s appointment of Charles W. “Chas” Freeman, Jr. to head the National Intelligence Council, which is responsible for producing the often important but sometimes off-the-mark National Intelligence Estimates."

"Freeman has come under fire for his often critical views on Israel, his sympathetic attitude towards the Saudis, and his opinion that the Chinese should have cracked down earlier on the Tiananmen protests. Freeman is a hyper-realist, believing that the use and conservation of hard power should trump any and all other considerations. He clearly is an unconventional thinker, and his views have often placed himself outside the mainstream of conventional foreign policy views.

Freeman brings to mind another famous free-thinker on foreign policy, John Bolton. "

"Although both believe in American power, Bolton sees it as something to project while Freeman regards it as something that should be conserved. Bolton views certain American allies, particularly Israel, as so indispensible that they should be forgiven for any and all transgressions, while Freeman, as the current controversy demonstrates, believes that Israel has made significant mistakes and should be held to account. Interestingly, the two switch sides when it comes to China, with Bolton far more critical of the current regime and Freeman more likely to tolerate its excesses."

&

"I think there are serious and important differences between the Bolton nomination and the Freeman appointment, enough so that I have less of a quarrel with those who support Freeman than I do with those who oppose him. But I think it is at best inconsistent and at worst intellectually disingenuous to suggest that Freeman’s past statements are irrelevant if you also were one of those who argued that Bolton’s past statements were damning."

re: "Senator Lugar Wants to Bring Back American Centers"

TSB at The Skeptical Bureaucrat ("Giving my fellow Americans the view from my cubicle") examines some of the issues involved with Sen. Lugar's suggestion.

Money quote(s):

"Far be it from me to nit-pick what a U.S. Senator says, especially when I agree with him,"

"(O)nly new embassies - meaning those that were built under the new construction program that started around 2000 - are located far from city centers, and not all of them are. Only 21% of our embassies and consulates are new ones, so I doubt the location factor alone can account for a systemic loss of public access. Many of the remaining 79% of our diplomatic facilities are right smack in the middle of downtowns areas, even those so excessively 'vibrant' (Damascus and Belgrade, for example) that it would be safer for our embassies to be a little more distant. Still, I take his point: our embassies get fewer walk-in visitors than our old American Centers did."

"(A)ll the offices and agencies under the authority of the Ambassador in a given country must be located together on a single compound rather than scattered around town. I must note the collocation requirement is not some State Department security standard, but rather part of Public Law 106-113, Title VI, Section 601, known as the "Secure Embassy Construction and Counterterrorism Act of 1999." The same law also requires every diplomatic facility to have a certain setback distance between it and the perimeter of the property on which it is located, something which is rarely possible in downtown areas and therefore contributes to the embassy remoteness problem."

He suggests:

"If Senator Lugar really wants to be helpful, he ought to sponsor a bill to amend the law so as to exempt American Centers. Then we might be able to open a few in those city centers where he wants them to be."

JG - Au revoir, Monsieur Ambassador

From my archive of press clippings:

Jamaica Gleaner

Au revoir, Monsieur Ambassador

published: Sunday July 20, 2008

Chester Francis-Jackson, Contributor

Catherine Chicate-Moibert from Guadeloupe brings a Caribbean style to the reception.

And so, after nearly four years here as France's first citizen, Ambassador Francis Hurtut demitted office on Friday, and left our shores, for his new assignment in Ghana, West Africa, but not before hosting a simply fabulous Bastille Day celebration last Monday to mark the anniversary of the beginning of the French Revolution that saw the end of the French royal family, and the beginning of the new French republic.

Read the whole article here.

Snippet(s):

"Jamaica was Ambassador Hurtut's maiden assignment in the capacity of ambassador, and coming on the heels of his predecessor, the very popular Ambassador Pierre-Antoine Berniard, there were concerns that he might have been found wanting."

"(W)hen the French celebrate Bastille Day here, it is a shindig to remember, as successive French ambassadors have made it a truly grand occasion.

Dears, we are talking pomp and ceremony, but none of that offensive or crass security screening that others have employed.

To be sure, there is a security check, with guests producing their invitations, with VIPs and other notables being waived through."

"Leading the notables out were Prime Minister Bruce Golding; Senate President Dr Oswald Harding; Security Minister Trevor MacMillan and wife, Dr Olivia McDonald; Transport Minister Mike Henry and his fab wife, Dawn; His Worship The Mayor of Kingston Desmond McKenzie; Director of Protocol Sandra Grant-Griffiths; Cabinet Secretary Ambassador Douglas Saunders; Ambassador Madge Barrett; Ambassador Maxine Roberts; Head of Immigration Joy Charlton; Head of the European Union Delegation Ambassador Marco Mazzocchi-Alemanni; US Ambassador Brenda LaGrange Johnson and husband, Howard; Belgian Ambassador Herman Portocarero and wife, Myriam; Mexican Ambassador Leonora Rueda."

&

"Also present were Canadian High Commissioner Denis Kingsley; Venezuelan Ambassador Noel Martinez-Ochoa; Ambassador of the Republic of Colombia Ventura Emilio Díaz Mejía; Ambassador of the Dominican Republic Filomena Navarro; Secretary General of the International Seabed Authority Ambassador Satya Nandan; Deputy Chief of Mission, Venezuelan Embassy, Madai Hernández and husband, Marcelo Muñoz; US Embassy Consul General Ed Wehrli and his charmingly fab wife, Rose, and UNICEF's Bertrand Bainvel."

LoveFM - AMBASSADORS PRESENT CREDENTIALS TO GOVERNOR GENERAL

From my archive of press clippings:

LoveFM.Com

AMBASSADORS PRESENT CREDENTIALS TO GOVERNOR GENERAL

June 16, 2008

Two ambassadors have presented their credentials to Governor General Sir Colville Young.

Read the whole article here.

re: "A Well-Credentialed (?) Ambassador"

TSB at The Skeptical Bureaucrat ("Giving my fellow Americans the view from my cubicle") has me wondering how he was able to re-post this without commenting.

JG - Much conviviality on EU Day

From my archive of press clippings:

Jamaica Gleaner

Much conviviality on EU Day

published: Sunday May 18, 2008

Chester Francis-Jackson, Contributor

Head of the EU delegation, Marco Mazzocchi-Alemanni (left), laughs with President of the Senate, Dr Oswald Harding, and Governor General Sir Kenneth Hall at the European Day reception on Hyperion Avenue, St Andrew, on Friday, May 9. - Photos by Peta-Gaye Clachar/Staff Photographer

There are heads of missions and there are heads of missions.

Here in Kingston, where the diplomatic scene is an integral part, heads of missions help in setting the tone of the social scene.

In their official capacities, they are required from time to time to play the role of hosts extraordinaire in celebrating national days, holidays, royal birthdays and decrees (where applicable) or in hosting visiting delegations.

Read the whole article here.

Snippet(s):

"In this respect, the history, personality and prominence of the mission, geopolitical considerations and social skills of the individual all go into the mix when it comes to the success of any reception/party being hosted.

In this vein, the European Union (EU) delegation here in Kingston has had the benefit of being led by very adept diplomats over the many years since the establishing of diplomatic relations with Jamaica.

Successive heads of mission have demonstrated a willingness to understand the peculiarities of a developing state like ours, and sought to have that come into play when implementing policy.

On the social note, succeeding EU heads have demonstrated that theirs is not the desire to serve from up on high, opting instead for meaningful interaction with the population at large."

"May 9 is perhaps the EU's single most important calendar date, as it is celebrated worldwide as Europe Day.

It marks the May 9, 1950 declaration by then French foreign minister Robert Schumann, which became the foundation on which today's united and expanding EU is founded."

&

"Notables in attendance Among the notables were Governor General Sir Kenneth Hall and Lady Hall; Prime Minister Bruce Golding; president of the Senate, Dr Ossie Harding and wife Marigold; Finance Minister Audley Shaw; (then acting) Minister of National Security, Senator Dwight Nelson; Attorney General and Minister of Justice, Senator Dorothy Lightbourne; Minister of Information Culture and Sports Olivia 'Babsy' Grange; Mayor of Kingston, Senator Desmond McKenzie; Senator Tom Tavares-Finson and wife, Rose; Opposition MPs Dr Omar Davies and Anthony Hylton; Chief Justice Zaila McCalla; Director of Public Prosecutions Paula Llewellyn; Director of Protocol Sandra Grant-Griffiths; John Issa and his daughter, the lovely Muna Issa; Dennis Lalor; Ambassador Richard and Margaret Bernal; Ambassador Madge Barrett and husband Tunty; Ambassador Maxine Roberts; Desmond and Peggy Blades; Chris and Michelle Bovell; Charles Hanna; Earl and Beverly Junor-Levy.

Also out were British High Commissioner Jeremy Cresswell and his companion Dr Barbara Munske; Spanish Ambassador Jesús Silva and wife Sara; German Ambassador Jurgen Engel; Belgian Ambassador Herman Portacarero and wife Myriam; Chinese Ambassador Chen Jinghua and wife Xiao Linhua; Russian Ambassador Viktor Zotin and his wife Olga Zotin; Canadian High Commissioner Denis Kingsley and Jo Ann Kingsley; Mexican Ambassador Leonora Rueda; Argentine Ambassador Mario Pino and wife Fanny; head of the International Seabed Authority, Ambassador Satya Nandan; Deputy Chief of Mission in the German Embassy Maria Friedrich Boerger, and husband Anton, and UNICEF's representative Bertrand Bainvel.

Also spotted were Dean of the Consular Corps and Honorary Consul of Slovakia, Christopher Issa; Honorary Consul of Iceland Robert MacMillan; Honorary Consul of the Royal Thai kingdom Thalia Lyn and hubby Capt Michael Lyn; Honorary Consul of Lithuania Lois Lake-Sherwood; Honorary Consul of Botswana Geoff Brown and wife Janet; Honorary Consul of Ecuador Clelia Barreto de Hunter; Honorary Consul of Poland Irena Cousins and Honorary Consul of the Philippines Everoy Chin."