U.S. Diplomat's
Letter of Resignation
February 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.
|