I was delighted when I read about Condoleezza Rice’s plan to transfer diplomats from Europe to understaffed posts in Asia, Africa, and Latin America.  One longtime problem with the foreign service has been that it was too successful in concentrating jobs where the living was easy, and where the real need for American diplomats did not justify the assignments.

Unfortunately, when I read the list of countries that will lose foreign service jobs under the Rice plan, I saw that only two of the reassigned diplomats will come from Britain, and none from France, Switzerland, Italy, or Spain, which have traditionally been the cushiest, most sought-after, and consequently most over-staffed. 

Langley Suffers Similar Mindset

Since 9/11, it has been crystal clear that we have needed more spies in countries where plots against us may be being hatched.  Yet according to Bill Gertz of The Washington Times, even after all the talk about the need for better intelligence since 9/11, we have fewer than 1,000 intelligence officers “working in the field as spies and spy handlers.” US News & World Report puts the figure at 1,200.

Whichever is right, the figure represents a miserably low percentage of the 20,000 or so CIA employees.  Certainly, it reflects poor leadership from the Bush administration.  But as veteran students of bureaucracy know, it also reflects a truth about the CIA bureaucrats that is similar to why foreign service officers try to preserve the cushiest assignments in Europe.  At the CIA, the institutional preference seems to be for the safety and comfort of a headquarters assignment at Langley.

Back in 1980 when I wrote my book, How Washington Really Works, I called this tendency on the part of our overseas services “Never Leave the Cities Where The Good Bars Are.”  It was unfair then as it is now to many dedicated CIA and foreign service officers.  But it remains a trait of human nature that is hard for agency heads to overcome.  Most of us would prefer Paris, Rome, London or even Washington to most posts in the third world.  That’s why those in charge must not only take the kind of stand Rice has, but have the resolve to really follow through. 

Comment RSS - Trackback URI