For the past few months there have been a series of reports about the State Department trying to send officials to Iraq for diplomatic work. Not surprisingly, State employees are, shall we say, reluctant to go.
Now, it appears the State Department, left with too few volunteers, is going to stop asking and start ordering.
The State Department will order as many as 50 U.S. diplomats to take posts in Iraq next year because of expected shortfalls in filling openings there, the first such large-scale forced assignment since the Vietnam War.
On Monday, 200 to 300 employees will be notified of their selection as “prime candidates” for 50 open positions in Iraq, said Harry K. Thomas, director general of the Foreign Service. Some are expected to respond by volunteering, he said. However, if an insufficient number volunteers by Nov. 12, a department panel will determine which ones will be ordered to report to the Baghdad embassy next summer.
“If people say they want to go to Iraq, we will take them,” Thomas said in an interview. But “we have to move now, because we can’t hold up the process.” Those on the list were selected by factors including grade, specialty and language skill, as well as “people who have not had a recent hardship tour,” he said.
Part of the staffing crisis seems to stem from concerns raised by Ambassador Ryan Crocker, who’s apparently discovered that the U.S. embassy is staffed by inexperienced aides.
“In essence,” Crocker wrote to Rice, “the issue is whether we are a Department and a Service at war. If we are, we need to organize and prioritize in a way that reflects this, something we have not done thus far.”
That doesn’t sound unreasonable, of course, but there’s that nagging little problem: no one wants to go to Iraq.
And they really don’t want to be forced to go to Iraq.
The union representing U.S. diplomats has officially objected to the Iraq call-up.
“We believe, and we have told the secretary of state, that directing unarmed civilians who are untrained for combat into a war zone should be done on a voluntary basis,” said Steve Kashkett, vice president of the American Foreign Service Association. “Directed assignments, we fear, can be detrimental to the individual, to the post, and to the Foreign Service as a whole.”
The result, in all likelihood, is not a bunch of unhappy State Department diplomats going to Iraq against their will, but rather, a bunch of unhappy State Department diplomats resigning all at once.
As James Joyner noted, “The move will likely spark resignations and cause talented people to think again about joining the diplomatic corps. It seems to me that we’d be far better off offering stronger incentives for hazardous duty: Higher pay, enhanced chances for career advancement, priority assignment choices, and the like.”
Stay tuned.