US diplomacy tainted by 'militarization' By Jim Lobe
WASHINGTON - While the Pentagon's budget has risen to heights not seen since
World War II, United States diplomatic and foreign aid assets have largely
wasted away and must be quickly rebuilt by any new administration that takes
office in January, said a new report released in Washington this week by former
senior foreign service officers.
The report, written by the American Academy of Diplomacy (AAD) and the Henry L
Stimson Center, calls for a nearly 50% increase in the number of diplomats and
aid and development specialists recruited into the foreign service over the
next five years.
This would cost about US$3 billion - approximately what the
Pentagon currently spends every 10 days on military operations in Iraq - over
current budget estimates.
"Since the fall of the Berlin Wall [in 1989], the diplomatic capacity of the
United States has been hollowed out," according to the 26-page report, "A
Foreign Affairs Budget for the Future", which said a continuation of the status
quo cannot continue without serious damage to the US's "vital interests".
A vacuum created by the lack of diplomatic resources - particularly in
comparison to the Pentagon's budget and manpower - has translated into the
militarization of US foreign policy, warns the report.
"Today, significant portions of the nation's foreign affairs business simply
are not accomplished ... The work migrates by default to the military that does
have the necessary people and funding but neither sufficient experience nor
knowledge. The 'militarization' of diplomacy exists and is accelerating."
To that end, the report calls for the State Department to take control from the
Defense Department (DOD) of nearly $800 million a year budgeted for several
security assistance programs, including humanitarian aid. The programs were
created in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks to help
allies prosecute the "global war on terrorism".
"Our view is that the secretary of state has and should have responsibility for
assuring that all foreign and security assistance is carried out in accord with
US foreign policy, including setting overall policy, approving countries to
receive assistance, and setting the budget for such assistance," the report
said.
"DOD's expanded policy responsibility for security assistance programs risks
the additional atrophy of the civilian agencies' ability to plan and conduct
foreign policy and foreign assistance and raises serious concerns that such
programs could conflict with broader US strategic and foreign policy
interests."
These expanded missions are not the core competence of the military and so may
detract from its readiness to perform more "central" military missions, it
added. "Finally, it is important for the US to ensure that its non-military
international presence and engagement be carried out primarily by civilians,
not by the military."
Indeed, the latest report echoes the views - albeit in more diplomatic language
- of a growing number of non-governmental organizations and foreign policy
experts that the Pentagon, simply by virtue of its enormous budget and its
worldwide presence with nearly 800 overseas bases, has become far too dominant
in policy-making.
Even Pentagon chief Robert Gates, a former senior intelligence officer, has
complained about the imbalance between US military and diplomatic resources.
"Funding for non-military foreign affairs programs ... remains
disproportionately small relative to what we spend on the military," he
declared in a much-discussed speech last November.
"What is clear for me is that there is a need for a dramatic increase in
spending on the civilian instruments of national security."
He said in July that diplomatic leaders, be they in ambassadors' suites or on
the State Department's top floor, "must have the resources and political
support needed to fully exercise their statutory responsibilities in leading
American foreign policy".
He has also noted ruefully that there are more people serving in military bands
than in the entire State Department.
Despite his support, however, Gates' views have not yet substantially altered
the political equation in Congress, which has routinely approved or even
increased the President George W Bush administration's budgetary requests for
the Pentagon over the past eight years. And Congress has cast a far more
skeptical eye on requests for the State Department, which lacks a comparably
broad-based geographic, commercial or demographic constituency.
The Defense Department is slated to receive well over $527 billion for 2009 -
not including some $15 billion a month for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan -
or roughly 13 times more than the State Department's budget of less than $40
billion.
Moreover, despite his concerns, Gates has asked - so far without success - that
substantially more money be allocated to the new discretionary accounts that
the Pentagon currently may disburse for allies in the war on terror, a request
which, to the dismay of most foreign service officers, Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice supported in hearings before Congress earlier this year.
The Pentagon last week submitted a new estimate for defense spending which
asked for $450 billion more over the next five years than previously announced,
according to Congressional Quarterly. The budget plan would begin with a nearly
10% increase in its 2010 budget to nearly $600 billion.
Compared to that request, the recommendation by the AAD-Stimson report to
increase the State Department's planned budget by roughly $3.3 billion over the
next five years seems paltry.
According to the report, which was put together by a task force of 14 former
senior foreign service officers with the help of an advisory group chaired by
former UN ambassador Thomas Pickering, the State Department currently suffers
serious shortages in personnel in virtually all of its operations, from
consular activity to development assistance and public diplomacy.
The report noted the decline in the foreign service and State Department
spending began at the end of the Cold War when the international affairs budget
was reduced by roughly 30% in real terms. Former secretary of state Colin
Powell succeeded in creating more than 1,000 new State Department posts between
2001 and 2004, according to the report, but these increases were quickly
absorbed by diplomatic surges in Iraq and Afghanistan, leaving other key areas
and global issues with significant staff shortfalls.
It called for total State Department staffing to increase from roughly 10,000
today to nearly 15,000 by 2014.
Jim Lobe's blog on US foreign policy, and particularly the
neo-conservative influence in the Bush administration, can be read at http://www.ips.org/blog/jimlobe/.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
