Throwback Thursday: U.S. Diplomacy's Presence Shrinking (in 1996)

Does anyone remember that guy standing next to Bill Clinton? He was a little hard to notice even when he was SecState, I'll admit, but that was Warren Christopher.

Nothing really changes here in the Seat of Government. Things come in cycles, the names and faces differ from one cycle to the next - sometimes, not always - but the basics stay the same. Just change the names and this WaPo piece from 1996 sounds like today's news.

U.S. Diplomacy's Presence Shrinking:

Country by country, post by post and mission by mission, the number of U.S. diplomats stationed abroad to track political affairs, police trade agreements and help American travelers is shrinking fast.

Relentless budget pressure that began in the mid-1980s accelerated with the Clinton administration's deficit-reduction plan, forcing the closing of consulates, aid missions, libraries, cultural centers and even a few entire embassies, from Italy to Indonesia, from Antigua to Thailand.

Since 1993 the State Department has cut more than 2,000 employees and shuttered consulates in 26 foreign cities. The Agency for International Development (AID), which runs foreign aid programs, has been hit especially hard by the Republican-controlled Congress and has closed 23 missions overseas.

-- snip --

In the short run, the cutbacks appear likely to have little direct impact on most Americans. Travelers who get sick or lose their passports may have to travel farther or wait longer to get help. Business executives may find fewer Foreign Service officers available to help them make contacts or cut red tape.

-- snip --

There is another side to the debate, however. Critics of the retrenchment say that over time it is bound to have a strongly negative impact on this country's ability to protect its citizens, promote U.S. interests and influence events.

Those observers include foreign policy specialists, experienced diplomats, secretaries of state from both parties and a wide variety of public interest, human rights and volunteer organizations. They fear that an erosion of Foreign Service training and field experience, combined with the loss of listening posts and a cutback in cultural exchanges, inevitably will diminish the contacts, experience and savvy that underlie successful diplomacy.

-- snip --

Christopher and his best-known predecessor, Henry A. Kissinger, have repeatedly sounded the alarm about what they see as a dangerous erosion of this country's ability to influence events abroad without sending troops.

"Our overseas representatives {are} already working under the most severe budgetary conditions ever," Kissinger said recently. "Further cuts would necessitate closing many overseas posts, with the result that there would be less complete political and economic reporting on foreign conditions, less effective representation and advocacy of U.S. interests in foreign countries and less adequate services to U.S. citizens traveling abroad."

-- snip --

The total budget for civilian international programs, the so-called 150 account, started to decline in the mid-1980s. It leveled off during the Bush administration, then resumed a downward slide in President Clinton's first year.

The 150 account includes the State Department, AID, the U.S. Information Agency (USIA), the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (ACDA) and the U.S. share of United Nations operations. In actual dollars, it dropped from $25.2 billion in 1984 to $18.4 billion this year, a 27 percent decline. After adjusting for inflation, the decline was 51 percent -- and that does not take into account additional erosion caused by the decline of the dollar against many foreign currencies.

-- snip --

At AID, the overall work force has been reduced from 11,500 to 8,700 and is heading down to 8,000. The number of full "sustainable development missions" -- on-site teams promoting long-term diversified economic development -- will decline from 70 at the start of the administration to 30.

-- snip --

The State Department is promoting the concept of "diplomatic readiness," similar to military readiness, in hopes of persuading Congress to divert some money from the defense budget into diplomacy and foreign aid -- activities that, in the diplomats' view, save money over time by reducing the need for military actions.

But there appears to be little realistic prospect that Congress will halt the downward trend in foreign affairs spending. Some key Republicans such as Sen. Phil Gramm (Tex.) are openly hostile to the Foreign Service, whose activities Gramm derided as "building marble palaces and renting long coats and high hats."

Even members more sympathetic to international engagement have said the most they can hope for is to avoid further sharp cuts. Some were upset last year when they offered to find an additional $1 billion for the 150 account, only to have the administration rebuff the offer because the White House refused to identify an offsetting amount to be cut from domestic programs.

-- snip --

However, the proliferation of tiny countries in recent years already has forced the State Department to abandon that principle [of universal presence]. The embassy in Seychelles is closing this year; that country and the Comoros, where the embassy closed in 1993, will be served out of Mauritius. Jeanette W. Hyde, the U.S. ambassador in Barbados, is also the ambassador to Grenada, Dominica, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Antigua and Barbuda and St. Kitts and Nevis. In most of those tiny Caribbean states, there is no U.S. diplomatic staff at any level. The same is true in the Solomon Islands and Equatorial Guinea.

-- snip --

The administration is seeking $5.45 billion for the State Department's 1997 share of the 150 account, about $170 million less than it sought last year. Christopher told a House Appropriations subcommittee that the amount is "the bare minimum we need to protect our nation's interests while balancing the federal budget in six years."

If Congress gives State what it is asking for, officials said, six posts on the "hit list" for 1997 will be spared: the embassy in Apia, Western Samoa; and the consulates in Florence [Italy]; Edinburgh, Scotland; Curacao [Netherlands Antilles]; and Matamoros and Hermosillo, Mexico. If Congress cuts deeper, those posts and probably more will have to go, Christopher said.

Say, did that federal budget ever get balanced? Probably not.

In 1996 our diplomatic presence stood at 238 embassies and consulates “plus a dozen or so special missions.” How does that compare to our diplomatic presence today?

Today it’s 259 embassies and consulates in 197 countries: 170 Embassies, 78 Consulates General, 11 Consulates, plus 5 Branch Offices and 11 other missions to multi-national organizations, for a total of 275 missions of all kinds.

Most Eyebrow-Raising Headline of the Week

"Low battery? Your pee can charge your smartphone" - Al Jazeera English

I've Seen Word Clouds From Both Sides Now

Rows and rows of empty chairs,
Appointees missing, no one's there,
While I fill out this questionnaire.
I've looked at clouds that way.

You know the song. Just hum along as you complete the survey request that you State Department employees received this week.

I saw a claim that over 10,000 employees have already responded to the survey, which, if true, means the million dollar contractor on this job will have a lot of work to do collating results of the multiple-choice questions, measuring the employee engagement stuff, and searching for key words in the open-ended comments that answered questions about "what three things would you change" and "what are the three things you're proudest of accomplishing," and so on.

How else would they go through that many open-ended comments except by searching for key words? Even with a million dollars worth of resources, you could barely skim the 10,000, 20,000, maybe even 70,000 replies this survey may get.

It's all just more material for Insiniam's word clouds. Who needs to read when you have data visualization? I imagine Insigniam's people are even now preparing binders full of cloudy graphics about autonomy, growth, meaning, and so forth. Once that's done, it will be on to the listening tour!

Most Eyebrow-Raising Headline of the Week

"Driver seriously injured testing anti-terror crash barriers" - UK Mirror

Most Eyebrow-Raising Headline of the Week

Waynesboro Police Investigate Cases of Pet Cats Being Shaved - NBC 29 WVIR


"Our world grows stranger and stranger, with each passing day" - Waynesboro Police Facebook post

USAID, Brother, It's Starting to Rain

Browsing the news about budget cuts, government reorganization, and the likely dismantling of USAID, I came across this Moment in Diplomatic History from the website of the Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training: The ACDA-USIA Merger into State — The End of an Era .

ACDA? USIA? That era ended so long ago that many currently-employed types might not remember those agencies, but they were once independent foreign affairs agencies until they lost a political fight and were absorbed into the State Department.

As the Cold War began to go into full swing, the United States soon realized the need for distinct agencies that would operate outside of the existing federal executive departments. Accordingly, independent agencies such as the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (ACDA) and the United States Information Agency (USIA) were created in 1961 and 1953 respectively to address new challenges and issues that were occurring in the ideological struggle of the time.

However, as the conflict gradually came to an end, certain individuals such as Senator Jesse Helms (R-NC), who was the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, began to see these organizations as superfluous and unwieldy and viewed them as “Cold War agencies.” He then pushed to fold them into the State Department. With the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998, both agencies were fully absorbed into the State Department by 1999.

-- snip --

When the Cold War was over, Helms, as the powerful Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, led a campaign to eliminate the three foreign affairs agencies – USAID, ACDA, and USIA – arguing it was necessary to cut costs and reduce the size of government. His primary targets were USAID and ACDA. He was not opposed to an independent USIA, but the Agency got swept up in his larger argument about the need to eliminate government agencies.

When these issues were debated in the first Clinton Administration, Vice President Al Gore and Elaine Kamarck, one of his senior staff advisors, led a vigorous campaign to maintain the independence of the three agencies. In letters to Congress, they argued their merger with State was unwise organizationally and would not save money. The Advisory Commission was deeply involved in this discourse and supported USIA’s independence.

In 1996, however, the politics changed. Incoming Secretary of State Madeleine Albright wanted to have a good working relationship with Senator Helms as Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee more than preservation of the three agencies. As President Clinton confirmed in his recent memoir, My Life, the administration needed the Committee’s support for its Chemical Weapons treaty. The reorganization of USAID, ACDA, and USIA was part of the deal.

-- snip --

When the dust settled in 1999, USAID had effectively fought to remain semi-autonomous. ACDA preserved its organizational coherence within State. USIA’s activities were decentralized throughout the Department.

One of the ways USAID fought for its survival was to do a data call and document how surprisingly few of its development dollars ever ended up with foreigners; a large portion of its budget stayed with contractors and vendors inside the Beltway, or so it told Senator Helms, anyway. But even that ploy might not help USAID this time.

With such a heavy budget rain about to fall, it looks like it's the end of foreign aid as we know it.

Jason For What in 2028?

Jason pops smoke and leaves the AO

I cannot help but see our esteemed Representative from Utah's 3rd Congressional District, Jason Chaffetz, as other than a Walter Mitty would-be tough guy, which is why I like to depict him as an action figure. Something small and harmless, but big in little-boy macho fantasies.

He posted this long goodbye to his political career on his FB page two days ago:

After long consultation with my family and prayerful consideration, I have decided I will not be a candidate for any office in 2018.

Since late 2003 I have been fully engaged with politics as a campaign manager, a chief of staff, a candidate and as a Member of Congress. I have long advocated public service should be for a limited time and not a lifetime or full career. Many of you have heard me advocate, “Get in, serve, and get out.” After more than 1,500 nights away from my home, it is time. I may run again for public office, but not in 2018.

For those that would speculate otherwise, let me be clear that I have no ulterior motives. I am healthy. I am confident I would continue to be re-elected by large margins. I have the full support of Speaker Ryan to continue as Chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee. That said, I have made a personal decision to return to the private sector.

What did he ever do in the private sector before he ran for Congress? He was a marketing guy for a Utah-based pyramid scheme called Nu Skin International, which is his biggest campaign contributor, and then he unsuccessfully applied for a job with the U.S. Secret Service. It's not like he has a private sector career to go back to.

It's hard to believe that such a major self-promoter as Rep. Chaffetz would ever leave politics. Some don't believe it, and point out that Chaffetz's campaign committee registered the domains Jason2028.com and JasonChaffetz2028.com just a couple weeks ago.

The answer must lie in the world of Utahn politics, where Senator Hatch really is retiring, and the manuvering to replace him is in high gear. Jason no doubt has something in mind for his future, and I don't think it's hawking that get-rich-quick scheme again.