I too thank you for your dedication. However, I feel it is your duty as a non-political appointee to speak out when you feel, based on your expertise, the Department is being damaged by the Administration, which is made up of temporary political appointees.
I propose that State and other key govt departments like the EPA institute tenure for those who have demonstrated years of excellent service as is done in academia so you have freedom to express your expert opinions without fear of losing your job.
59
@Larry Feig The State Department has the dissent channel and it was used quite a bit at the beginning of this Administration. But is has been unused for quite a while, because any dissent falls on deaf ears. With the departure of so many senior people, many working in the mid-levels are demoralized, overworked. While there has always been a little self-censoring for career reasons, this goes beyond that. People are either afraid to speak out or too conscious of rejection. Not everyone, but everyone is affected by what is happening. No matter what Pompeo says or does, "swagger" is not what most are feeling these days.
21
@EHK Unless you are on the receiving end of dissent channel messages, you would have no way to know how frequently it is being used. Suggesting that nobody is dissenting by any other means is disingenuous at best.
6
It is a great thing that our country recognizes the service of our active military, veterans and first responders.
It is past time that we finally recognize the incredible sacrifices that our diplomats and their families perform overseas. In a real sense, they are like first responders in trouble spots around the world where most Americans would not choose to live.
We need to support the State Department by recognizing that these people work for the Constitution and the people before that of the president.
56
As a former career diplomat and ambassador, I applaud the writer’s general sentiments, despite my disgust at what Trump has done to weaken our foreign policy and undermine US interests and standing abroad, but she is incorrect in her characterization of the oath of office, by which the oath taker swears to protect and defend the constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, bear true
allegiance to the constitution and faithfully execute the duties of the office. It says nothing whatsoever about allegiance to or serving at the pleasure of the president.
76
*support* and defend...
3
While I thoroughly understand the desire to leave (or have already left) the Foreign Service, I am truly grateful for the thinking and dedication shared by Ms Fitzsimmons, and all those who have chosen to remain in their jobs. It will allow us to be one step closer to righting the ship, and make it just a tad less difficult, once this Administration moves on.
17
these career bureaucrats are often clueless and are susceptible to herd mentality, with nary an original idea. in my experience, they are correct 50% of the time. which means they are worthless. the list of failures is breathtaking.
maybe a handful should stay on as a career, and everyone else should be replaced every 4 years.
I hope you mean, you took the oath to support and defend the constitution of the United States, rather than president's pleasure. Especially, the current president and his pleasure.
2
Thank you for your service. And thank you for your impassioned defense of the agency you serve. I sincerely hope that you receive thousands of emails similar to mine.
4
Well, if you serve 'at the pleasure of the President' (rightly or wrongly) and if the President does not like your tome, you might get fired.
And the perks aren't too shabby either, are they Elizabeth. What a self-serving bunch of blather.
3
Consider the 1984 movie, "The Wannsee Conference".
Thank You.
1
To become a FSO, one has to get a high pass on one of the most difficult examinations given by the US Govt. One has to be the master of at least one foreign language, and, in the course of a career, master several more. An FSO can never count in living in one place for more than a few years. They are always ready to move a considerable distance, often continents away from home. And, as we see with the present Administration, justify new policies while turning on a dime. We also see that are shot at, sometimes killed, suffer diseases and sometimes die, and deal with dangers to their children. If this is the "Deep State", God bless it.
28
Glad to read this article and the point of view of the author. I feel I know something more about the State Dept. and its people than before I read it. To the author, thank you for your service.
4
Am I the only one who read her reference to serving at the pleasure of the president as part of her "commission we receive" when becoming a foreign service officer? I don't recall seeing anywhere in her article an assertion that this was part of her "oath" to protect and defend the Constitution. Two different things--commission and oath.
2
It would be nice if ALL civil servants had views similar to Ms. Fitzsimmons. Bless her. All employees in the Executive Branch serve the President in office whether or not they voted for that President or like or dislike that President. If they cannot do that, the honorable thing is to resign. Ms. Fitzsimmons will probably be criticized by those suffering from TDS, but I admire her sense of duty. It is good to know that there are civil servants and FSOs who do their duty.
3
@Robert Atkinson
What a gross charge that Federal civil servants are not loyal to the country if the President happens not be of their liking. I served 41 years in the civil service along with hundreds of co-workers during that tie period and I never, never experienced a person as defined by this commentator. Although all had their personal political beliefs they did not interfere with their performance; all quietly and effectively carried out their duties I bet this continues today.
1
I think this lovely piece is very much an eloquent companion piece to the Op-Ed published in recent weeks by the young woman choosing to leave the State Department.
Two thoughtful, dedicated professionals, each grappling with their conscience, coming to different principled conclusions.
We gave them each a monstrous President and -- in different ways -- they have both acted with deep thought and commitment to American ideals.
9
There are many patriotic diplomats out there who are sacrificing their lives for the best of our country and we have to thank them always. However, the author in this article stated that the “oath” she took when joining the DoS was to serve under the president’s “pleasure”... I am still unsure what that really means. I thought that the oath she took was to “support and defend the constitution of the United States.” I find her argument completely wrong. You took oath to serve and protect the constitution and not a president.
I, however, believe there are two different versions of FSOs. Those who take orders from our Oval Office and just deliver them in order to preserve their jobs quietly without any questions. And on the other hand you have those who are trying their best to protect government institutions and fight back racist foreign policies coming from a racist president — such as Trump’s #MuslimBan that aims to separate families and puts Consular Officers in a very difficult situations.
We still need to thank and support our FSOs. Bless them.
15
@Ayyad Amin. The two are correct. Support and defend the constitution, but also to support the foreign policy of the president. It's long been accepted in the FS that if you can't support the president's policy, you should resign. I think that is what Elizabeth was trying to get at. I know her personally and I know she is a woman of integrity and balanced ego.
4
Our Foreign Service has a long and proud reputation. Working there has to be rewarding. At this point in time it is also challenging. Morale is under attack. Hoping you will hang in there and persevere. You and your fellow employees have a world of valuable knowledge that must not be wasted and ignored. So, head down, trudge on. Your fellow Americans are coming to the rescue. We will use our ballots as bullets - and will terminate the chaos and insults that emanate from our Tainted White House and less than stellar Trumputin appointees. The light is at the end of the tunnel. Thank you for your service, dedication and professionalism. Cadet Sharpie Bone Spurs is headed for a full reckoning.
7
If my boss was on a devil's crusade to break the very back of the organization for which I toil, I don't know how I could continue.
Then again, I didn't take an oath to support and defend our Constitution. Nonetheless, thank you for your service to our country and the world.
9
First of all, thank you for your continued service. It cannot be made any easier by this administration insistence on ignoring any and all advice from career public servants. I wonder how long people like you can hold out when you know your words fall on deaf ears, but I applaud your determination to try to survive this dark period in our nation's history. May brighter days be ahead for all of us.
3
Ms. Fitzsimmons, I have worked with many of your colleagues in North Africa and Cuba in their work for Public Diplomacy. I remember the evacuations, the self sacrifices and my best memory of them still going full speed ahead with their best efforts to advance the interests of our country.
Best wishes to continue on with your love for the U.S. Department of State.
7
Wow, seriously, let's be honorable. Everyone deserves to feel that they make a difference. Just walking away maybe the direction for some and I can understand. We have to also understand those who stay. Reminiscent of The Honest Spy....a book worth reading.
Ms. Fitzsimmons, in almost every way I support your position and dedication to DoS. The only point of difference is that the Foreign Service and the Civil Service swear rather different oaths on employment. The FS may indeed serve at the pleasure of the President - the CS does not. The Civil Service, like the military swear our oaths to the Constitution and we do not serve at the pleasure of any transient political figure. Good luck!
6
I worked for 30 years as CS employee for Dept. of Defense; FSS for USAID; and FSSO for Dept. of State. I was always proud of each Agency, those who were in charge of 'my' various offices, and LOVED the career I had chosen and for which I worked. I am now retired and the many (mostly) good memories I have, stay with me, for which (at 89), I am grateful.
11
As someone who is married to a career civil servant, I can only say one thing:
Thank you for your service!
5
Could it not be that those who are leaving the State Department are also doing so out of their love and commitment to the institution and its people—that because they care about to the institution, they cannot remain and be part of its slow decline? And that this can be a moral stance rather than just knee-jerk partisanship? Both staying and leaving can be evidence of commitment and service; I appreciate that Ms. Fitzsimmons wants to continue to do good from within, but there's an implicit denigrating of the "leaving" side that I can't totally abide by.
13
Ms. Fitzsimmons- I have the deepest appreciation for your service to the nation. It sounds like a platitude but I mean it. So-called "bureaucrats" are derided in some quarters especially (but not only) on the Right but that is usually when the officials are speaking uncomfortable truths or upholding the law. Government service can be a higher calling. Clearly your love of country goes well beyond the bombast and lip service that is typical fare these days.
4
" The phrase “the toughest job you’ll ever love” was technically the slogan for the Peace Corps in 1961 under President Kennedy. But there’s a good case to be made that these days it applies to the State Department. "
It was the slogan, not technically the slogan whatever that means. And referred to living and working conditions that were part of the job as well as the job itself. . My Peace Corps partner and I, 63-64, before host families, used and maintained a latrine, had no shower or tub, bought a 2 burner propane stove, no fridge, no car, bike nor mule. I later served as an FSO in three hardship posts. NO COMPARISON. No case to be made that these days that " slogan" applies to State.
10
As a former State Department official I find this to be a curious article, beginning with the motivations for writing it in the first place. It’s hard to swallow the author’s self-portrait of a beleaguered and heroic patriot. She is just not bothered enough by the current regime to remove herself from its machinery. Not that that administration will thank her, since her underlying tone implies she does not fully support it. And I never cease to be amused by Foreign Service officers who believe they are sacrificing a more lucrative career on the outside. More often than not this betrays an ignorance of exactly how marketable (or not) the average FSO in the private sector, not to mention skipping over many of the in-kind benefits of a career in the Foreign Service, often including free education of their children in international schools that offer International Baccalaureate programs. The author has not taken a principled stand; she is simply indulging in self-comfort and a bit of self-disillusionment.
20
I’m a former Foreign Service Officer as well, and I respectfully disagree with everything you said. We are big enough and civil enough to have differing points of view, and reasons to serve or leave, without impugning the motives or beliefs of others.
12
@Janet Flanner As a former federal law enforcement officer who had numerous occasions to work with the DOS both in and outside of the USA I find this article interesting. The author sounds sincere and I may have enjoyed working with her. Having said that, most of my experiences with DOS bureaucrats were painful. They were extremely rigid and difficult to work with. Another adjective one could also utilize would be pompous. When visiting embassies or consulates one was made to feel that you were lucky to be allowed admittance. FSOs have a difficult job to do but they didn't have to take out their frustrations on a "lowly" law enforcement officer.
4
@Donald in too many respects, LEOs and FSOs have conflicting tactics, but mutual goals. Can both get territorial and down right obnoxious, yup. The advantage the FSO has there, they were trains to be, while LEOs were trained to be objective and fair, not politically realistic.
Thank you for this letter. My son joined the Foreign Service a year ago. What an education this has been for me. I participated in his matriculation process, met several DOS professionals, and members of his class. I was impressed by all. I was unaware of the many duties and professions the DOT employs: teachers, librarians, engineers, medical professionals, business people, IT specialists, the list goes on. Had I known about the Foreign service years ago, I would have joined.
Soon I am off to visit his first post.
May the good works of the DOT continue in spite of the current floundering of our foreign policy.
53
Not sure about which “oath” Ms. Fitzsimmons took, but the oath to which I swore as a Foreign Service Officer promises “to support and defend the Constitution of the United States” and says nothing about fealty to “the pleasure of the president of the United States.” Ms. Fitzsimmons has many important observations about the career Foreign Service, but her reference to an oath about serving at the president’s “pleasure”is completely wrong.
139
@Richard Gilbert. The two are correct. Support and defend the constitution, but also to support the foreign policy of the president. It's long been accepted in the FS that if you can't support the president's policy, you should resign. I think that is what Elizabeth was trying to get at. I know her personally and I know she is a woman of integrity and balanced ego. In the most senior positions in the FS, requiring Senate confirmation, yes you do serve at the pleasure of the President.
2
I work for a government agency and have worked with many FSOs. These are outstanding people who would excel in any career.
I am routinely amazed by State Department colleagues who in weeks have to gain expertise in a subject area that I have had two decades to learn.
Re pay, note that an FSO salary has to cover the whole family because it is difficult for foreign service spouses to find work abroad.
13
The author of this article, and those who read it while congratulating themselves as being righteous preservers of our democracy, are nothing more than complicit with the Trump administration. I think there's a genuine difference between those whose who have been trying to preserve and protect the institutions of this government, and are fighting back on the policies coming down from the executive (whether quietly or loudly), and those who further the administration's policies and do their job without question, in order to preserve their jobs, while their colleagues are fired for calling out the administrations policy demands. I personally know many who have been "asked to leave" because they refused to work on projects focused on "christian genocide" or countering "muslim extremism", inflated topics the administration is using to wage race wars and incite hatred through our foreign policy, as well as through our domestic policies. I know people who have been harassed and threatened, verbally and sexually assaulted by this administration's lackey's and who have been let go for "behavior problems" because their supervisors did not want to get fired by raising these complaints through ethic channels that are supposed to protect people. Those who stay, and those who argue they are staying because they love their job and they are a-political, are actually complicit with this administration's policies.
5
@Andy
Sounds a lot like a major corporation for which I worked. Principles and ethics were the prerogative of the "worker bees" rather than management. When a manager suggested I could be fired for insubordination for bringing to light an ethics violation, I knew it was time to leave. Isn't it sad that those who value truth and integrity are usually not valued?
2
@Andy Too severe a judgement. I disagree with you. Most who stay love their jobs and hope to persevere until this idiotic chaos is brought under control. The American voter will step forward in the 2020 election and right the Ship of State. Trump and his ship of fools are burnt toast.
1
While America lives in hope that government agencies generally do good work for us and the world, it has to also be remembered that the Nuremberg trials were littered with people justifying their actions with the excuse that they were merely serving their masters, and they were following the law.
16
It's a bit sad to see a career civil servant publicly rationalize why she stays at her job. I get it, but it's just another example of how far we've slid.
16
Foreign Service Officers do not “serve at the pleasure of the President,” a term of art used in federal employment law to describe Schedule C political appointees who can be terminated without cause. Ms. Fitzsimmons repeats this dangerous fiction TWICE, and no one at the Times appears to have thought to fact-check it.
30
Perhaps the author truly works doing good, without political influence from the occupant of the White House. But she is wrong in thinking that this last presidential transition was like the others. The current president lacks a democratic mandate and basic decency.
Should the president order the author to do evil, whether it be by attacking democracy abroad has he has at home, or by hampering the global effort to combat climate change, she will face a stark choice. She should be careful that her defense of the professional ethics of the foreign service does not morph into a Nuremberg defense.
9
@Ezra I have a hunch that there is a lot of "slow walking" going on. Implemetation of idiotic directives can take quite a while. Meanwhile, in 14 months this ship of fools administration will dissipate. Then, the recovery work will take place.
1
Elizabeth, thank you so much for that reminder, for the service you provide and for your representation of our country. It is good to be reminded that there are very many Americans serving our country in many ways, regardless of politics and partisanship. As an American overseas, I have had firsthand experience with the services you provide, and they are worthwhile and good. And as a private American citizen overseas, I, my family and many like us also try to serve as the best ambassadors we can possibly be, even when our hosts and non-American colleagues question all that is going on in the United States. I love you, and by that I mean the United States of America.
6
Secretary Mattis famously said: "If you don't fully fund the State Department, then I need to buy more ammunition.” People who go abroad, on behalf of America, armed with a rifle, have a certain respect for people who go abroad, on behalf of America, without the rifle. Is anyone surprised?
31
And thus why we had such high hopes for Secretary, General-retired Patras. None understand the most effective military is the one so feared, dealing with the diplomats is the only rational option, than said military and diplomats.
If there are no limits to whom you will faithfully serve, if you swear an oath to defend the constitution but willingly serve a president who trashes the Constitution, what good are you? At some point, you have to realize that your oath to the constitution requires you not to serve a president who imperils it.
11
@Robert Then who will? Bring in more people who imperil the constitution?
9
@Robert
Federal government employees are not a check on the President. That is the job of the other two branches of government: the legislature and the judiciary. Stop looking to civil servants to somehow "check" the President by refusing to work when they disagree with his actions or policies. If the President's policies are anathema to the constitution, illegal, or immoral, then it is our responsibility as voters to insist that our elected officials perform their Constitution-mandated role to check him/her. And if they don't, then it is our responsibility to vote in representatives that will.
21
I'm finally reading something that makes me proud to be an American again!
14
As the daughter of an FSO , I grew up in State Dept., and I believe it is the cushiest job in the gov - anyone who has ever had a diplomatic passport - the privileges that gets you,the automatic deference and respect, not to speak of hardship pay, good bennies and a union with excellent retirement - no, I have no sympathy for a foreign service worker crying victim.. My dad, who was possibly closeted gay, lived through the Lavender revolution..He survived..I really do not feel your troubles, like I do with the experts at the EPA, NOAA, BLM, who are true experts who are being sidelined and losing their jobs because of this anti-science republican admin..A state dept person doesn't feel the effects of policy discrimination as much as scientist, do , and the pay and bennies are just outrageous for FSO's...
10
There will always be those who jeer you and those who cheer you. It's called Democracy. I'm proud of my 30 foreign service years with State. Thank you for yours.
24
I worked for the state department’s intelligence bureau for more than 40 years before retiring recently. I never met anyone who resigned because they disagreed with the politics of the administration in power. I stayed, and so did most of my friends and colleagues, because we had mortgages to pay, children to feed and clothe, and bills to pay. And we also happened to have very interesting work to do each day.
In the last couple of years, we have read commentaries (including several here on the pages of the New York Times) by foreign service officers who claim to have resigned or retired because they disagreed with the policies of the Trump administration. Hogwash. What most Americans do not know is that there are very strict promotion rules in the foreign service, and if you don’t meet certain criteria within a defined window of time, you are dismissed. And if you are a career ambassador, there is always the chance you will not get the onward ambassadorial assignment that you like, or feel you are entitled to. Then there are the millennial foreign service officers who leave the service simply because they didn’t get the cushy overseas posting that they sought.
In other words, don’t believe everything you read.
16
@David Or maybe there are people at the State Department who aren't as cynical as you are, and actually took a stand on principle instead of collecting a paycheck to promote stances they know are wrong. Just because you don't care what harm you do as long as it pays the bills doesn't mean everyone else is happy to do the same.
9
I'm glad somebody at State defends the Constitution 24 hours a day 7 days a week. The president defiles the Constitution 24 hours a day 7 days a week.
28
Having lived in the Middle East and Africa for many years, never as an employee of the US Government, I'd like to express my deep appreciation and admiration for Ms. Fitzsimmons and her colleagues at State. Their commitment, intelligence, integrity, and sense of mission are awesome.
Apart from the spirit of public service which they share with many of their US Government coworkers, I believe the experience of living abroad helps them clarify the values they prize, sometimes simple things like separation of church and state, generosity of spirit, freedom of expression, and the incorruptibility of public officials. Living outside its borders helps them see the US as a single nation rather than an assortment of tribes. For all its flaws, they are intensely proud of that nation, as we are proud of them.
16
The constant refrain of "if we all leave who will continue to champion American diplomacy" is facile and rings hollows. What about when it isn't worthy of championing? Yes, the State Department is full of bright and capable people doing meaningful things, as the author seems to be doing in the Africa Bureau. And of course we understand that U.S. interests and values have always run up against each other in deeply complicated ways, across every presidential administration. That said, many of us feel this moment is exceptional. Many of us feel this is a moment that requires brave people to stand up, push back, and say no to policies that alienate allies, embolden autocrats and dictators, and denigrate principles of human dignity. It takes real moral courage and thoughtfulness to establish a limit on the policies you'd be willing to represent in the world. That is true patriotism. What is your limit?
12
@Ruby
"What is your limit?"
What makes you think the career federal employees who have dedicated themselves to serving the American people and their interests don't ask themselves this question every day?
What makes you think there aren't "brave people" pushing back from within?
True patriotism does not demand quitting in public protest any more than it demands abandoning one's principles.
15
I think framing any of this in terms of patriotism can be problematic. I mention it only in response to the author’s claim that staying to keep the ship running is somehow patriotic. I’m not sure it is, but it’s a choice everyone in the organization makes for themselves.
I honestly didn’t see a lot of push back from within when I was at State. Of course, I was just one tiny piece in a big bureaucracy, but I didn’t see much that was inspiring on that front. Wish I had.
4
@Ruby Remind me how you can change or defend the institution from without? I have seen so many ambassadors in these pages and on television, so many mid-level officers going out in a blaze of editorials - and to what end? The political process in America is very much the same. The state of affairs is very much the same. The only thing that would change by a mass exodus of real patriots from the State Department or government generally is that the policies you hate most would have no brakes or oversight whatever. This officer is keeping the lights on and carrying on the work that we believe in as a people, but which doesn't make the presidential daily brief. Fighting windmills and thinking you're actually making a difference is the hallmark of every Facebook warrior. Actually staving off the worst of things is the work of heroes. Sometimes pushing back is harder than a meme or a few paragraphs on the internet. Sometimes it requires access, reticence, and patience. I would rather Ms Fitzsimmons stay in and do the hard things than spend a few hours moaning on cable tv, heard only by people who agree with her.
13
Sadly, your boss thinks you are there to serve him.
6
Ok but what if the person you serve repeatedly breaches core values and same principles? The same argument that a commitment to serve has to transcend party could be employed to justify serving anyone, no matter what they did. When and where have we seen that?
5
As a retired career Foreign Service Officer who served in the Middle East and Africa, I applaud DAS Fitzsimmons' "Love Letter" and concur heartily with her description of the demanding, and often dangerous, role of our diplomats promoting US foreign policy interests. I take exception, however, to her assertion that we take an oath to serve the President. We do not. We take an oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic." We serve at the pleasure of the President. He can fire us, anytime. But, we owe a higher allegiance to the Constitution. In any conflict between the two, our sworn loyalty is clear. I pray that my Foreign Service successors are equally clear.
224
@Ken As far as I know the only FSOs that would relate to her statement "to forget that the oath we take when becoming diplomats says that we serve at the pleasure of the president of the United States. " are those who are political appointees or careerists in "plum" political posts. Talk to the little people; not the DASs.
I too have all respect for the Department of State and its employees, both FS and GS. I also believe in fighting from within to do the best to maintain the DoS mandate and integrity. I totally agree that the highest obligation of staff is allegiance to the Constitution. I only hope that the current DOS staff will have the ability to defend their actions when they are rid of the oppression.
And for all those DOS and USAID staff who voted against HRC because of her tenure at State, I hope you felt the joy under Tillerson. ;-)
29
Alas we had such high hopes for Secretary Tillerson, but he was proof again that domestic corporate success doesn’t mean you will be good at governance.
Those who didn’t vote for HRC were nothing but blinded by hearted and idealism, as many of Ross Perot voters were, we were just lucky that GHWB wouldn’t have been as much of a disaster as GWB, much less DJT.
4
Thank you for writing this important message, and far more importantly, for your service to our country. As a career federal employee at EPA, I will say that much of this piece ring true for me, and reflect the intelligent, hard working and dedicated professionals among whom it has been my honor to serve for almost 30 years. I’m sure your perspective is shared by civil servants across the span of departments and agencies.
It’s easy to bash bureaucrats, but the reality is that we are well served by individuals who choose a career in the public sector. I thank you and your State colleagues for your service and join you in looking forward serving different administrations in coming years.
101
@Natmee
"the reality is that we are well served by individuals who choose a career in the public sector"
[citation needed]
3
@Natmee
As a retired career federal employee, I agree completely. We are from the federal government, we are there to help— and we do, in everything from diplomacy, trade, economic development and human rights to science, infrastructure— the list is long.
14
Thank you for your service!
5
Thank you for your dedication and service. Government employees, not the political appointees, are the engine that keeps our nation running. From the State Department to EPA to NOAA and across all agencies, the people do their jobs for our country in spite of politics.
10
@Andra Bobbitt. As Paul Krugman wrote years ago (to the effect), "A nation that hates all government will always have bad governance."
Prescient much?
9
@Andra Bobbitt In spite of politics, NOAA?
I take Ms. Fitzsimmons' points, essentially all of them, having pursued a career dedicated to the constructive potential of scholarly internationalism. As such, I honor foreign service and journalism probably in inverse proportion to the degree that President Trump disparages them.
Yet my concern comes from reflection on the following passage, "It’s easy to hate the idea of America, but really hard to hate an actual American who is in [another] country trying to improve [their] educational system."
Why would it be hard for foreigners abused by this current administration to hate us when we do such a superb job hating each other at home, egged on daily at the highest reaches of our government?
5
Your State Department service will live on in the people you help and the message you carry around the world. Please hold your head high (despite the clear diminished standing the US has amongst its allies). You can speak for this American by telling the people you interact with that most Americans I know still believe in lifting all boats.
5
I was jarred by Ms. Fitzsimmon's statement of being pulled out of a senior position by Rex Tillersons's team. The wholesale takeover by Trump's ignorant goons in just about every sector of the federal government is not only maddening, but frightening. I appreciate that Ms. Fitzsimmons stays in her position---we badly need people like her in government service, especially foreign service---but let's not kid ourselves. This administration is corrosive and disheartening, no matter how dedicated one is to their job. It's amazing she's lasted this long.
32
@Birdygirl Consider for a moment, long-gone Rex Tillerson is now considered one of the good, sane "adults" in this woefully benighted administration we accorded ourselves in 2016.
Not you; not me, but we. We had better come to terms with this reality of collective national fiber if we expect to change it.
8
For the life of me, I cannot understand why more high profile people have not stood up and shouted that there are great federal employees in all agencies. The destruction being done by Trump administration to our infrastructure and the people in it is horrific. Will take a long time to repair...
9
A state department member using "Game of Thrones" as a reference.
That's encouraging.
7
@Raz
I conjecture that while that reference troubles you, the President’s laudatory comments about Kim Jung Un, Duterte and Putin do not. Nor does his saber rattling with Iran. In other words, stuck in maniacal partisan desire to denigrate anyone who is trying to do his or her job in a non-political manner, you choose to take pot shots rather than respect the spirit and intent of the op/ed. Putting it in a riff on another Hollywood popular motif, “ Have fun polarizing the castle....”.
5
No, your oath is to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. Thank you for your service.
14
@RichKolker “support and defend”, not “protect”.
2
Elizabeth, I'm so proud of you!
4
I think the question of whether or not you should work at the State Department under a president who's policies may be counter to what people think of as "traditional" is - it depends.
It depends on your work and how much of it is affected by what he says or tweets or the policies he puts into place.
So if you can do your work without compromising your principles, then I laud you for that. I do not think that option is afforded to all in the State Department.
20
In 1963 when I got out of the Army, I knew that I didn't have what it takes to succeed in the Foreign Service, and have managed, nevertheless, to be happy and successful in my subsequent career(s); nevertheless, I have always regretted missing my opportunity in those days.
Thank you for working for us all in the meantime, and truly "holding down the fort" when the world has trembled in frightening ways off and on during the intervening years. Best of luck in your efforts to keep our ship afloat now!
4
This was a refreshing bit of awesome.
11
Thank you:
For your service
For your dedication
For your support of the Constitution
For your common sense
For your blinded view of politics
For your courage to share your views with us
For your attitude
For your love of Country
During these challenging times, your voice of reason rings loud and clear, hopefully others will join you to support and aid in your quest.
11
Thank you for staying. In this difficult time we need people like you, committed to service and our country’s ideals. We can all rest easier at night knowing you and many others like you remain on the job.
9
@Bruce Wharton
Yes, but what happens when a President is not committed to "our country's ideals" and he is your ultimate boss?
1
Yes! Shoes on ground, not boots. The funding for State should be increased significantly. State needs to get the taxpayer actively supporting their work by educating the American people about their mission and accomplishments. Other agencies have run TV ads telling their story; the VA, the Post Office. The DoD spend millions of dollars on recruiting. Diplomacy starts at home. Serving globally since 1789.
26
As a Foreign Service officer who recently resigned in protest of this administration’s cruel, often incoherent policies, I was very eager to understand the motivations of those who stay.
I was left unsatisfied by Ms. Fitzsimmon’s explanation, which sounded more like an oath of loyalty to an organization than a profession of love for America.
Surely the author has a personality and a morality -- hopes, fears, values -- that are independent of the State Department’s strategic goals.
When these clash, what does she do?
64
@Chuck Park
Everyone's experience, and their decision making process, is different. One of the great plagues of our time is the tendency to sneer at anyone who doesn't do exactly as I do.
15
@Chuck Park See my response - I think the answer is - It depends on how much of the work she does is affected by the decision making of the current administration.
I've been in groups at work that are in antithesis to what I do and the majority of us hold clearances. I've been in leadership and found my leadership to be corrupt. I chose to distance myself and/or leave. But I found others at different levels can come in and work as they please.
Everyone does not pull in the full spectrum and assess values are part of the work they do.
4
@Chuck Park I find it quite surprising that you still don't "understand the motivations of those who stay." Did you not have a single conversation along these lines with any of your former colleagues before you quit?
Every Foreign Service Officer I know has thought long and hard about their own approaches to the dilemmas they face in their positions, where their own red lines are, and how they will respond. They were doing so before November 2016, and will continue to reevaluate throughout their careers.
I'm sure Ms. Fitzsimmons has faced many such decision points in her 25-year career, and apparently continues to determine she can serve her country and its people better by staying than by leaving.
You made a different decision. That was the right choice for you. But neither Ms. Fitzsimmons nor any other FSO who stays owes you any explanation of why they do so - satisfactory or otherwise.
14
Bravo to a member of the so-called “Deep State”. These sentiments, and the actions of patriots such as Robert Mueller, prove that loyalty to our constitution—and our national mission—for many civil servants is higher than fealty to a political party or philosophy.
If the sitting President is proven to be indictable for criminal misconduct, let’s hope that members of Congress are equally dedicated to democracy as enshrouded in the balance of powers. Sadly, I’m not counting on it.
Party to party team warfare and loyalty to political spin are today way more dangerous elements in our Republic than the Deep State.
17
Sometimes it is hard to see what value we bring when it seems diplomacy is questioned as a way to solve problems and understand the other side. The author reminds me of why we do this.
11
Thank you so much for writing this piece. It is very reassuring to know that the State Department is full of those who serve with such integrity and loyalty to the country and the Constitution. Thank you for your dedication and your service.
17
Thank you for the service to our country. It is your fidelity that secures the underpinnings of our precious democracy.
9
Thank you for staying. I wish you well.
9
Great article. Thank you.
1
Bravo! Thank you for your service...
1
From an ordinary middle-of-the-country citizen, I love you back. Thanks for hanging in there.
67
Thanks, Martie. Couldn’t have said it better.
4
Luckily for us, there are civil servants like this. I've had the pleasure of vetting many of them.
34
@kozarrj I'm a retired Foreign Service Officer. When/how did you vet me ot other FSOs?
1