Diplomatic...

Well, I'm not exactly sure what to call this article. Whining? Legitmate complaining? Something in the in middle probably.

It now seems, nearly five years after the war began, the Department of State will start forcing diplomats to serve in Iraq. Now, I can name a few grunts over there on the third tour who are probably saying "its about f*&!?!#@ time!" On the other hand I can understand why -- for a number reasons -- this hasn't happened until now.

The first reason why is simple. It comes to mind fairly quickly. The Pentagon ran Iraq for a couple of years. Some say the Five-sided Wind Tunnel still does. But I digress. Seriously, there was a lot of confusion about who ran what back in the day. From what I gathered after the Transfer of Sovriegnty June 28, 2004, the State Department sent an ambassador over. Unfortunately he sort of took a back seat to influencing events on the ground. Whatever you want to call it, the next guy there was a little more proactive. One factor could be he was Muslim. Whether we like to admit it or not that probably gave him a common ground with insane political scene that is Iraq.

Anyway, its been almost five years and the war is grinding on. A team that reportedly works together is now in place over there. Be that as it may... the fact is there are a lot of vacancies over there in the Republican Palace. For some reason, State hasn't deemed it wise to send anyone over on "forced assignments" until now.

As expected, a few diplomats aren't being so nice and playing by the rules. I know a guy who works at State. Apparently, and this was a shocker to me, the notion of forced assignments is buried in the State Department employment contract or handbook. It just hasn't been done since Vietnam, according to CNN. State just hasn't been willing to exercise that option until now.

Here were are in the biggest war since Vietnam and State probably hasn't played their fullest game. Now, don't get me wrong. I feel for them. It does suck to be over there. Who woulda thunk it would be possible for diplomats to go to a war zone? Don't get me wrong. They have been there since Day 1. But it seems it took the department a while to get up to speed. The first Provincial Reconstruction Team opened in Mosul back in November 2005. Now, according to the Foreign Service Journal, there are more scattered about the country. Awesome.

(Here are couple of links on PRTs. This is a fact sheet put out by the embassy in Baggers.
And this is another fact sheet put out by State. Just as an aside, does anyone know if they're working? What they're working on?)

I've seen and met with American diplomats in Iraq. They're great people. Many want to do the right thing. Most want us to succeed over there. It was their bosses back here, those sitting in Foggy Bottom, that weren't quite up to dealing with reality. I have no idea where that fault lies though. Condi? Colin? The National Security Council? The White House? The American public? The media? All of us?

Now, thankfully, two of the three barrels of foriegn policy (the other being economic) are coming to bear over in Iraq. Good luck over there, guys. Its a doozy of a place. But you won't ever forget it. Remember to drink three cups of tea every chance you get.

Oh and one more bit of advice: learn the language.

Ma'salama habibi!