U.S.
Diplomat's Letter of Resignation.
New
York Times - 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 so 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.
|