Foreign Affairs Turf Wars

THE DAILY FED

Foreign Affairs Turf Wars

Culture clashes, bureaucratic turf wars, and distrust underlie the proposed plan to merge the nation's foreign affairs agencies, The Washington Post reported today.

Since Clinton's April 17 decision to reorganize the State Department, the U.S. Information Agency (USIA), the Agency for International Development (AID), and the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (ACDA), some employees of those agencies have been digging in to fight the merger. Many are worried they will lose their jobs.

"It is a perverse rule of bureaucracy that people with a common set of goals and a common set of agendas are the ones most likely to end up at each other's throats," said L. Craig Johnstone, director for resources, plans and policy at the State Department in April.

House Republican staff aides say employees are lobbying Congress to stop the foreign affairs reorganization.

An anonymous paper, "Some Questions and Answers for Conversations With State Colleagues You Meet on the Metro," circulated around USIA recently, according to the Post. The paper, srongly critical of the State Department, calls for a "systematic examination" of foreign policy goals before any reorganization is considered.

Some employees are concerned that the cultures at the different agencies will clash if they merge. The State Department is seen as secretive, valuing diplomatic discretion, while USIA is said to favor a more open approach. ACDA is seen as an enclave of narrowly focused military analysts while AID cultivates a do-gooder image.

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright told employees last month that they'll have to deal with the coming changes.

"The current structure of our foreign affairs agencies reflects the needs of an era that no longer exists," she said. "We have to show zero tolerance for waste and we have to welcome accountability."