(Or at least diplomatic positions)
Last month, we held a discussion on the practice of big contributors and bundlers becoming politically appointed ambassadors despite sometimes having little (or no) foreign policy experience and not speaking the language of the host country. I planned to write an entire post on it, but the sixteen comments pretty much said everything I would have said. I’d like to just share one quick link on the subject. According to Open Secrets:
“The 19 ambassadors that CRP has found in our campaign contribution database, along with their spouses and children, have given more than $98,200 to Obama personally, bundled at least $3.4 million for his 2008 presidential run and bundled another $1.4 million for his inauguration.”
These also aren’t new kids on the fundraising block:
“The new nominees for ambassadors to Belize, Belgium, Liechtenstein, Romania and Switzerland — along with their spouses and dependent children — have contributed at least $637,800 to federal candidates, parties and committees since 1989, CRP has found. Nearly that entire sum has gone to Democrats, including $32,775 to Obama himself and $8,300 to former primary opponent and now-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.”
Look on the bright side though, the U.S. isn’t the only country that wraps up money with diplomatic positions. First Diplomatic offers to negotiate diplomatic titles for people:
“This diplomatic appointment and passport program is for persons of wealth and means, who are serious and can provide the host country a useful service in return for the appointment : having an office as the Honorary Consulate, host visiting dignitaries from the country. Sometimes this “useful service” is as simple as giving the right amount of money to the right people. We offer legal assistance in applying for citizenship and a diplomatic passport. Several small countries and island countries grant a diplomatic passport and an appointment for people who are able to match the country’s criteria and who can provide the necessary contribution. Active positions (Consul, Vice Consul, etc) have serious requirements, that is why honorary positions (Honorary Consul, Honorary Ambassador) are very popular among medium and large business owners who want to protect their business and have much more opportunities than a normal citizen. Diplomatic passport holders bear diplomatic immunity, which is recognized within 192 countries of the world UN members.”
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
TH-
A Japan-hand by the name of Tobias Harris wrote up a nice post over at his blog, Observing Japan, on the Roos appointment. He makes a few cogent points at to why the appointment of a deep pocketed lawyer is not such a big deal, and that a Huntsman style nomination for Japan would most likely have been a waste of talent. I very much recommend reading his post.
I used his reasoning as a springboard for my own post on the matter, where I took a look at a ten or so of the ambassadors nominated so far. While I really hate to promote my own material (it just seems so selfish), I will go ahead and do so anyways. If interested, you can find that post here.
This has always struck me as being akin to a President making his biggest campaign contributors into admirals and generals, then putting them in charge of a base or carrier. I’ve long admired the State Department’s meritocratic nature (where anybody smart/knowledgeable/lucky enough to pass the exam can join the elite ranks of American diplomats), but it’s disheartening to consider that an FSO can spend a lifetime working to the rank of Ambassador, only for some rich dude to be assigned the same privilege just for having thrown money at the right Presidential candidate. I’m sure John Roos will make great use of his deep insight into Japanese culture and political history to bolster US relations with our most important Asian ally, and that he will parachute into Tokyo barely even needing his ‘Basic Japanese Phrases’ flash cards. Barely.
Countries that are of political, economic, and/or military importance to the United States should be posted with the best person available. This is America’s face after all. I think the spoils system is ridiculous and the campaign contributors should just be limited to minor countries like Tonga. Or perhaps Sealand is more their level. ;P
While I agree with Tobias Harris that the appointment of Roos to the Japanese ambassadorship is no real change or trial for US-Japan relations, I must feel somewhat disgruntled at the system that creates such a useless position in the first place. If the Ambassadorships of major allies like Japan, the UK, etc. are so unimportant that we can appoint major campaign donators with little or no knowledge of the country or even US foreign policy in general, then why should we be spending taxpayer money to pay their salaries and living expenses in the first place? Instead, the president should invest in placing real talent, especially career diplomats, in all high positions like Ambassadors, and allow those experienced and knowledgeable individuals to truly exercise some amount of their hard-gained judgment and power over the management of such integral posts. As someone who has railed against the current campaign donations system, I expected better of President Obama than continuing the gratuitous tradition of using important posts as political spoils. Yes, it’s an ingrained system, used beyond memory in countries around the world, but that doesn’t make it any more justifiable or less corrupt.
I agree with Disgruntled.
It is disturbing that so little respect is given to the Ambassadorship position.
This seems like a bizarre complaint or criticism. Ambassadorships have ALWAYS been doled out to political supporters without regard to experience or ability by presidential administrations of both parties, and probably over the course of the entire history of the United States. Is there something going on in this administration that is any different than the previous 43?
Quite frankly, I am very much put off by reactionary Obama-bashing. For the first time in 16 years I feel as though we have an administration that consistently tries to keep policy at the center of activities as opposed to other concerns. We need to give this bud every opportunity to bloom.
@C.A. Palumbo: I have to disagree that this administration, “..consistently tries to keep policy at the center of activities as opposed to other concerns.”
Mr. O’s recent Asia excursion goes to show that there was very little in the way of policy advancement. Additionally, this “climate change” nonsense is an example of putting “other concerns” above good policy. The fact that the administration is even still advancing the idea of human-caused global warming, especially in a place like China where there are very real problems with actual pollution is a prime example of letting political self-interest corrupt legitimate policy progress. Instead of hounding China about CO2 (which is not a pollutant as it’s essential for plant life,) Obama should be focusing on industrial pollution (SO2, arsenic, benzene, etc.) Even in light of the recent Climategate revelations that further illuminate the global warming scam, the Obama administration maintains that carbon caps are important. Obama isn’t keeping policy at the center — he’s advancing the cause of government control of the means of production using carbon caps as the tool. Obama’s climate stance smacks of Soviet-style “Five Year Plans.” The Bush admin (and Clinton as well) attempted to advance real issues like trade and regional security. Obama is chasing climate-change phantoms at the expense of the US (and ultimately the world) economy and national security. It will be great when US environmental policies aren’t dictated by skewed data and disingenuous interpretation. CO2/Human-caused global warming is a myth. Global warming due to human activity/carbon emissions doesn’t fit the temperature trends. We are wasting our diplomatic capital in advancing global warming issues when we should be using that capital on actual environmental problems, regional security issues, trade and human rights. For Obama, playing to the AlGore collectivists/socialists is more important than advancing America’s interests. This “bud” is blooming and unfortunately the flower fits the seed.
Im wondering if anybody who works in foreign policy (ie an officer) can answer some questions I have about working in foreign affairs. I’m interested in going into foreign affairs so if anybody could help me out I’d really appreciate it.
(globi.hill@gmail.com)