[SOC] Fwd: diplomat's letter of resignation

[Lloyd Lachow]

>                                                     
>                    Subject: diplomat's letter of
> resignation                        
>                                                     
>              
> 
> Perhaps you've already seen this, but thought I'd
> send it around in case
> not. It's powerful to me.--C.
> 
> >Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company
> >
> >U.S. Diplomat's Letter of Resignation
> >
> >February 27, 2003
> >
> >The following is the text of John Brady Kiesling's
> letter of
> >resignation to Secretary of State Colin L. Powell.
> Mr. Kiesling is a
> >career diplomat who has served in United States
> embassies from Tel
> >Aviv to Casablanca to Yerevan.
> >
> >Dear Mr. Secretary:
> >
> >I am writing you to submit my resignation from the
> Foreign Service
> >of the United States and from my position as
> Political Counselor in
> >U.S. Embassy Athens, effective March 7. I do so
> with a heavy heart.
> >The baggage of my upbringing included a felt
> obligation to give
> >something back to my country. Service as a U.S.
> diplomat was a dream
> >job. I was paid to understand foreign languages and
> cultures, to
> >seek out diplomats, politicians, scholars and
> journalists, and to
> >persuade them that U.S. interests and theirs
> fundamentally
> >coincided. My faith in my country and its values
> was the most
> >powerful weapon in my diplomatic arsenal.
> >
> >It is inevitable that during twenty years with the
> State Department
> >I would become more sophisticated and cynical about
> the narrow and
> >selfish bureaucratic motives that sometimes shaped
> our policies.
> >Human nature is what it is, and I was rewarded and
> promoted for
> >understanding human nature. But until this
> Administration it had
> >been possible to believe that by upholding the
> policies of my
> >president I was also upholding the interests of the
> American people
> >and the world. I believe it no longer.
> >
> >The policies we are now asked to advance are
> incompatible not only
> >with American values but also with American
> interests. Our fervent
> >pursuit of war with Iraq is driving us to squander
> the international
> >legitimacy that has been America's most potent
> weapon of both
> >offense and defense since the days of Woodrow
> Wilson. We have begun
> >to dismantle the largest and most effective web of
> international
> >relationships the world has ever known. Our current
> course will
> >bring instability and danger, not security.
> >
> >The sacrifice of global interests to domestic
> politics and to
> >bureaucratic self-interest is nothing new, and it
> is certainly not a
> >uniquely American problem. Still, we have not seen
> such systematic
> >distortion of intelligence, such systematic
> manipulation of American
> >opinion, since the war in Vietnam. The September 11
> tragedy left us
> >stronger than before, rallying around us a vast
> international
> >coalition to cooperate for the first time in a
> systematic way
> >against the threat of terrorism. But rather than
> take credit for
> >those successes and build on them, this
> Administration has chosen to
> >make terrorism a domestic political tool, enlisting
> a scattered and
> >largely defeated Al Qaeda as its bureaucratic ally.
> We spread
> >disproportionate terror and confusion in the public
> mind,
> >arbitrarily linking the unrelated problems of
> terrorism and Iraq.
> >The result, and perhaps the motive, is to justify a
> vast
> >misallocation of shrinking public wealth to the
> military and to
> >weaken the safeguards that protect American
> citizens from the heavy
> >hand of government. September 11 did not do as much
> damage to the
> >fabric of American society as we seem determined to
> do to ourselves.
> >Is the Russia of the late Romanovs really our
> model, a selfish,
> >superstitious empire thrashing toward
> self-destruction in the name
> >of a doomed status quo?
> >
> >We should ask ourselves why we have failed to
> persuade more of the
> >world that a war with Iraq is necessary. We have
> over the past two
> >years done too much to assert to our world partners
> that narrow and
> >mercenary U.S. interests override the cherished
> values of our
> >partners. Even where our aims were not in question,
> our consistency
> >is at issue. The model of Afghanistan is little
> comfort to allies
> >wondering on what basis we plan to rebuild the
> Middle East, and in
> >whose image and interests. Have we indeed become
> blind, as Russia is
> >blind in Chechnya, as Israel is blind in the
> Occupied Territories,
> >to our own advice, that overwhelming military power
> is not the
> >answer to terrorism? After the shambles of post-war
> Iraq joins the
> >shambles in Grozny and Ramallah, it will be a brave
> foreigner who
> >forms ranks with Micronesia to follow where we
> lead.
> >
> >We have a coalition still, a good one. The loyalty
> of many of our
> >friends is impressive, a tribute to American moral
> capital built up
> >over a century. But our closest allies are
> persuaded less that war
> >is justified than that it would be perilous to
> allow the U.S. to
> >drift into complete solipsism. Loyalty should be
> reciprocal. Why
> >does our President condone the swaggering and
> contemptuous approach
> >to our friends and allies this Administration is
> fostering,
> >including among its most senior officials. Has
> "oderint dum metuant"
> >really become our motto?
> >
> >I urge you to listen to America's friends around
> the world. Even
> >here in Greece, purported hotbed of European
> anti-Americanism, we
> >have more and closer friends than the American
> newspaper reader can
> >possibly imagine. Even when they complain about
> American arrogance,
> >Greeks know that the world is a difficult and
> dangerous place, and
> >they want a strong international system, with the
> U.S. and EU in
> >close partnership. When our friends are afraid of
> us rather than for
> >us, it is time to worry. And now they are afraid.
> Who will tell them
> >convincingly that the United States is as it was, a
> beacon of
> >liberty, security, and justice for the planet?
> >
> >Mr. Secretary, I have enormous respect for your
> character and
> >ability. You have preserved more international
> credibility for us
> >than our policy deserves, and salvaged something
> positive from the
> >excesses of an ideological and self-serving
> Administration. But your
> >loyalty to the President goes too far. We are
> straining, beyond its
> >limits, an international system we built with such
> toil and
> >treasure, a web of laws, treaties, organizations,
> and shared values
> >that sets limits on our foes far more effectively
> than it ever
> >constrained America's ability to defend its
> interests.
> >
> >I am resigning because I have tried and failed to
> reconcile my
> >conscience with my ability to represent the current
> U.S.
> >Administration. I have confidence that our
> democratic process is
> >ultimately self-correcting, and hope that in a
> small way I can
> >contribute from outside to shaping policies that
> better serve the
> >security and prosperity of the American people and
> the world we
> >share.
> >
>
>http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/27/international/27WEB-TNAT.html?ex=1047369063&ei=1&en=e013a569bf18b2fe
> 
> 
> >Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
http://taxes.yahoo.com/