bout de papier, Vol. 6, No. 1 (1988) — Spring 1988 // Printemps 1988, p. 33
The following article, from the Sudan Times, Khartoum, was re-printed recently in the American Foreign Service Journal: It is with interest that we note… a perceived lack of strength in the ranks of the career diplomats in the Foreign Service. We note that as with other areas of life such as the media, the government is intent on fashioning institutions in its own image. Such narcissism is usually only found in the activities of dictatorial regimes. Perhaps the government’s present flirtation with the idea of making political appointment to the career Foreign Service is an indication of more such actions to come. Certainly, in the field of foreign affairs the pros of making political appointees, especially to the post of ambassador, are likely to be outweighed by the cons.
Purely on the grounds of a stable approach to international matters, it is in the interest of the country to maintain a career diplomatic service. These people are functionaires that have been trained for certain activities in our embassies around the world. Their training and their adaptation to circumstances … means that these career diplomats are part of a stable representation of this country in the world. Naturally it takes time and experience for a career diplomat to work his way up to the rank of ambassador, but it means that when the person achieves that rank, he is eminently qualifed for the position. The adoption of political appointees could upset all of this by becoming an obstacle in the way of promotion for the career diplomats, and also because the appointees would be likely to upset matters due to a lack of understanding of the finer points of diplomacy and their lack of training and expertise. Diplomacy and ambassadorships ought to be a matter of vocation and not political appointment.
One wonders what kind of a mess the government could get itself into if it did start making political appointments. … It is very likely that government interference with the career Foreign Service will lead to confusion and instability in the image that this country presents to the world through its embassies and ambassadors. Seeing as how the diplomats have objected so strongly to suggestions of political appointees in the past, they are unlikely to be willing collaborators in any such scheme if it were to be introduced in the future. The diplomats are likely to use everything within their power to hinder the introduction and to make such appointments untenable if they are ever made.
Sudan, like other Third World countries, spends a lot of finance on the training of government officials, and the Foreign Service is no exception. It appears wasteful to allocate such scarce financial resources and then not utilize such trained personnel when they become available. On the financial side, the making of political appointments by the government could prove self-defeating in the long run. Does the government really intend to squander part of the country’s resources?
It is undoubtedly in the interest of the country that the Foreign Service should remain a career service, and the government will do well to heed this advice.
In its April 24 edition, the Toronto Sunday Star explored some of the same themes:
Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, who last week told newspaper publishers he’d had a bum rap from their reporters on his patronage record, has some opportunities to prove it.
A number of juicy appointments will have to be made shortly.
Lucien Bouchard, his old friend and ambassador to France until his recent cabinet appointment, was a Mulroney patronage choice, and the career diplomats will be watching to see who gets Paris this time.
Stephen Lewis, the former Ontario NDP leader, was an early and highly advertised Mulroney appointment as ambassador to the United Nations. Now he’s headed for a teaching job at the University of Toronto.
Roy McMurtry, former attorney-general of Ontario, is expected to leave London in August after a stint as high commissioner, but it has been a long time since any nonpolitical figure has held that post.
Allan Gotlieb, a fixture in Washington as ambassador since 1981, has had an unusually long run and is expected home within months, possibly to become head of Ottawa’s troubled National Arts Centre and perhaps a university.
Another professional diplomat, Barry Steers, has been ambassador to Tokyo for nearly eight years and is expected to be moved this year.
With an election campaign likely coming, Mulroney can be expected to be extremely careful about putting more old buddies in high places — not least because it didn’t always work well.
View the original scanned pages →
Originally published in bout de papier, Vol. 6, No. 1 (1988) — Spring 1988 // Printemps 1988, p. 33. Read the rest of this issue →
