Diplomats Declining to Go to Iraq
Several hundred U.S. foreign service officers gathered at the U.S. State Department in
Washington on Halloween to remove their masks of obedience.
The diplomats were responding to announced plans to “force-assign” a number of them to Iraq.
There are about 250 serving there now, all volunteers, but about 50 will be needed as replacements and volunteers are lacking.
Some 200-300 have been identified as “prime candidates” because of their skills.
The remarks of Jack Crotty, 36-year veteran Foreign Service officer, were applauded by many.
He said force-assigning to a place like Iraq was “a potential death sentence, and you know it. Who will take care of our children if we’re dead or seriously wounded? At any other embassy in the world, the embassy would be closed with all these incoming rockets...
“It’s one thing if someone believes in what’s going on over there and volunteers,” he said.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice replied that “people need to serve where they are needed.” And Ambassador Ryan Crocker said that any who “put their personal safety over the national interest are in the wrong line of business.”
Depending on how long they’ve been with the Service, foreign service officers make several times what our soldiers, sailors and Marines in Iraq are making. Most of the latter probably did not volunteer to go to Iraq. And they are at considerably more risk.
It is difficult to have much sympathy for the diplomats.
2 Comments:
I wonder if these diplomats will still identify themselves as "public servants?"
Diplomats make more becasue they're more qualified -- speak languages, negotiating skills, etc. .They do a totally different job than soliders. Soldiers are for wars, diplomats should be sent in afterwards -- not during. We have more members of military marching bands than we do U.S. diplomats -- and we want to send 10% to the Green Zone? I'm glad they spoke up and protested this craziness.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home