State to cut 10% of diplomatic posts worldwide

Citing strains from Iraq and Afghanistan, the US has announced it will cut diplomatic posts by 10% next year. State has had trouble filling 250 foreign service jobs in Iraq and another 100 "high priority" jobs in Afghanistan. It has finally brought these embassies to 100% occupancy -- but at the cost of leaving other posts vacant.  Shortfalls result because State's operating expenses come out of the supplemental, but the correlated increase in personnel costs must come out of State's regular budget. 

Ironically, the most vocal supporter of boosting State's regular budget has been none other than Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. On Nov. 26, he noted that "funding for nonmilitary foreign affairs programs . . . remains disproportionately small relative to what we spend on the military. . . . The total foreign affairs budget request for the State Department . . . is less than what the Pentagon spends on health care alone."

We've repeatedly highlighted this disparity, and argued that it is deeply undercutting our chances of success in Afghanistan. America is engaged in a "struggle of ideas" that it cannot afford to lose. Amidst a half trillion dollars in military spending this year, does it make any sense to cut critical (and cheap) diplomats? MORE

U.S. to Cut 10 Percent of Diplomatic Posts Next Year By Karen DeYoung (WP) Thursday, Dec 13: Diplomatic posts at the State Department and U.S. embassies worldwide will be cut by 10 percent next year because of heavy staffing demands in Iraq and Afghanistan, Director General Harry Thomas informed the foreign service yesterday.

 

The decision to eliminate the positions reflects the reality that State does not have enough people to fill them. Nearly one-quarter of all diplomatic posts are vacant after hundreds of foreign service officers were sent to embassies in Baghdad and Kabul, and Congress has not provided funding for new hires. Many of the unfilled jobs will no longer be listed as vacancies.

Citing "severe staffing shortfalls," Thomas asked each assistant secretary of state to prioritize jobs in his or her bureau and identify the least critical 10 percent by next Monday. "If we cannot realistically fill all of the positions currently vacant," he wrote in a cable sent throughout the department, "good management dictates that we . . . focus on the most essential."...

Pressure to fill about 250 foreign service jobs in Iraq led to a highly publicized dispute within the foreign service last month as Rice warned that she would mandate Iraq assignments if enough volunteers did not step forward. Those positions and nearly 100 "high priority" jobs in Afghanistan have now been filled for next year -- making them virtually the only U.S. embassies in the world at close to 100 percent of authorized staffing levels -- but Rice left open the possibility of "directed assignments" to other hardship posts if necessary.

While the Baghdad and Kabul embassies are the immediate cause of the vacancies elsewhere, the State Department suffers from a deeper problem of flat hiring budgets. The size of the foreign service, about 6,500 diplomats, increased by approximately 300 positions a year between 2001 and 2004, but since then Congress has rejected requests for additional hiring for all but consular and security positions...

"The administration has not really fought" for diplomatic staff increases "the way it has fought to get all of the additional resources that the Defense Department and the military have needed since 9/11," said Steve Kashkett, vice president of the American Foreign Service Association, the union that represents U.S. diplomats. "We have seen a shrinking of the diplomatic component of foreign affairs and a dramatic expansion of the military component."

Kashkett noted that Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates -- not Rice -- spoke out recently to call for more resources for diplomacy.

In a Nov. 26 speech that both shocked and pleased foreign service officers, Gates noted that "funding for nonmilitary foreign affairs programs . . . remains disproportionately small relative to what we spend on the military. . . . The total foreign affairs budget request for the State Department . . . is less than what the Pentagon spends on health care alone."

Although the State Department's operational expenses in Iraq are funded out of the same supplemental appropriations that pay for the military there, personnel costs come out of the department's regular budget. Funding levels remained static under a continuing resolution for fiscal year 2007 that covered all departments except defense. In its fiscal year 2008 request, the administration has asked for 262 new diplomatic positions.

In addition to creating staffing strains, the shortfalls limit the number of foreign service officers who can be diverted into language and other training that numerous studies have said are crucial to meeting new diplomatic challenges.

Kennedy said the administration does not view the high staffing levels in Kabul and Baghdad as permanent and that the 10 percent cuts elsewhere would be reconsidered next year. "It depends on how many we have in Iraq and Afghanistan and how the budget request fares," he said....