re: "Diplomats to be Drafted!"

Thanks to JustBarkingMad for the link.

Quotes:

"I’m sure that the FSOs would much rather serve in a nice Caribbean or European locale however America’s diplomats are most needed where things are most dangerous."

I can confidently assert that anyone who thinks that all Caribbean (or even all European) posts are either comfortable or safe is under the mistaken impression that U.S. diplomats serve at one of the Hedonism beach resorts instead of what in many cases are capital cities with slums on par with any in the rest of the Third World featuring violent gunmen to match.

Just before I got my orders to Iraq I was in such a Caribbean capital. One evening I was attending a Christmas celebration of the local police Criminal Investigations branch. Since they worked on passport and visa fraud issues with us, they had invited our entire section. I was in a conversation with some of the police officers there and the topic had turned to Iraq and the local army. They weren't signed up for the Coalition of the Willing at that time (nor since), but one of them observed that they should just send some of their gunmen over there and they'd "sort things out right quick."

"I’d be willing to bet that many of those selected are people who have already served over there, in one form or another, and those that have expressed support for the current Administration."

Until I get a look at the implementing instructions on this, I can't say for sure who's been selected (me? again?) or by what criteria.

I would note that we are approaching the due date for the next bidding cycle. Actually, we're a bit past the original deadlines, but they've been postponed recently due to delays in the promotion list for the Senior Foreign Service and the Merit Step Increase lists. Whether or not someone was on one of those lists can seriously impact what kind of jobs one is eligible to bid, so bidding has remained open.

It's also a near certainty that this directed assignments issue was also coming down the pike and constituted another reason to stave off the bidding deadline a bit longer.

I'm going to hazard a guess that the 200 or 300 FSOs being notified about this are:

1. Current bidders. In other words, random officers in the middle of their tours, or already in training (including long-term language training) for positions for which they were already paneled and assigned, probably aren't the ones being tapped;

2. Going to be advised to add at least one Iraq (or Afghanistan?) job to their bid list, from the 40 or 50 jobs currently available. That way, the assignments people will be able to pick the most qualified officers for each job.

But that's just a guess.

"(T)he average FSO spends twenty years of a thirty year career abroad. There will be no doubt that this fact will be used, by some, to claim that they already _are_ making a sacrifice. However, I have an old classmate from High school who has spent most of his career overseas…almost exclusively in northern and western Europe. Which was his expressed desire since he first set out to join the Foreign Service when he was selecting colleges. As far as I know he has _never_ served in a third world hell hole."

Sounds like someone pretty far along in, perhaps nearing the end, of their FS career.

Nowadays there are rules called "Fair Share" which serve to even the assignments playing field so that everybody gets a shot at the "nice" (and predominantly Western European) jobs and everybody serves at a hardship post, or at least bids on one, if they haven't served at one within a certain number of years. The timing and the rules for this have been tightening of late, to shake some officers out of just such comfortable career patterns as JustBarkingMad's classmate.

I can also confidently assert that I probably wouldn't have gotten my (former)Western European assignment had I not done a tour in Iraq first.