Interviews > Deborah Jones

​

Is the foreign service a vocation or a profession?

For me the way I entered foreign service was very serendipitous. What we have right now is that you come in and that’s all knowledge-based. Once you get in, if you get in and make the right connections, it will advance your career. That is different from a profession that you study for and get into. 

Everybody has an opinion on what we should do, but not everyone has the background, the history, knowledge and the expertise to deal with the issues.

There are three things you will be faced with when entering foreign service. First, keep in mind that it is the fighter pilot getting the medal, not the mechanic. Second, when a military person dies, he is a hero, but when a diplomat dies, he is a victim. Third, when you see the person is different from you, foreign or has an accent, will you do anything possible to help them succeed, or will you anticipate failure?

As long as you come in and understand the mission of the organization, and don’t distract from it, that is what matters and you can succeed. Otherwise, you should look for another job, because there are many where you can be more of an individual. This isn’t one of them.

On militarization of diplomacy 

Our words are our weapons. What we are trying to do in diplomacy is find space for agreement. Our words are therefore necessarily vague and nuanced, which drives the military crazy. You can’t nuance a missile, it’s either launched or it isn’t. Our two cultures are very different, and I heard from commanders all the time that they shouldn’t be expected to do the work of diplomacy, the work that we should be doing. But I honestly don’t know where we are headed. The benefits of working at diplomacy, however, outweigh its problems. Diplomacy is and should be about how well we collaborate with our allies.

On the future of foreign service 

For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction, and that’s where unintended consequences in our policies come in. Technology has always disrupted governments and how they function, and it will continue to do so. The brilliance of Donald Trump is that he understands that the tweet is his use of force. It gets out to all these people very quickly and it’s his way of maintaining that kind of presence. I think we have to look at different formats and formula for our presence and for our modes of communication, and the future of the foreign service should reflect these changes.

When you think about it, our government buildings—whether it’s the Supreme Court, Congress or the White House, they are very hierarchical. They look like roman temples, but the world doesn’t function like that anymore. Why isn’t, for example, the Department of Agriculture in Nebraska or Kansas? I think the Covid-19 crisis will break things down and will create new opportunities, but it will also affect diplomacy and the use of soft power. Globalism follows capitalism. But even capitalism is under stress right now. 

On how diplomacy and the way it is conducted has changed over time

A lot of people have a misunderstanding of what it means to be a diplomat. A lot of diplomacy is, in fact, maintenance of agreements that have been made before, that we all take for granted. You are a fish in the water and you don’t even know you are in the water. But if you have mailed a letter, traveled abroad from one airport to another, all these things involve diplomacy. They involve negotiated agreements, trade agreements, international postal agreements. There is so much maintenance that goes into world order, and that is really what our job is about. 

One thing that I believe has changed is predictability. We approached the world from a position of strength following WWII, but also with an accepted bipartisan notion that policy disputes stop at the borders of the United States. What we would always say is that any policy we represent overseas is reflective of a bipartisan consensus. Therefore when we would promote policies overseas, we knew that we have the full backing of the White House. I think that has changed. There has been a rise of so-called celebrity diplomacy. This notion that I can make this or that work because I am friends with this or that person. I don’t only fault this administration for that. 

I do think there is going to be a big change in what you need to know. Things that are more technical will become more important, but also it has become apparent how intertwined the world has become. You can’t just be a political officer anymore. You need to study economics, as it has a big impact on politics, but so do other things like science, technology, diseases etc. Things that we know were important for some time now but no one wanted to really focus on will require our attention. 

All I can suggest for diplomats and aspiring diplomats is to know your history, know what has happened in the past. If you are working with another country, know enough about them to know what triggers them, what they have been receptive to and what they have rejected. Americans are very good at going overseas and preaching, without having a clear understanding of what our own past is. But also, keep in mind that we are unique. We are not a country of one race or background, we are a country of immigrants. And people will point that out to us more and more now that we are on the downside, similar to what people said after 9/11. Understand our history, and our past failures. 

Know how to write, know how to think, and make sure to read more conservative media and be exposed to opinions other than your own. Those skills will still serve you well.

​

​