[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 38 (Monday, March 10, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3400-S3401]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           A DIPLOMATIC LOSS

  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I wish to call attention to a piece that 
appeared on the editorial pages of the Washington Post on Sunday. It 
was a letter of resignation from John Brady Kiesling, a career State 
Department diplomat who offered some very compelling thoughts about the 
state of our international relations.
  After two decades with the State Department, Mr. Kiesling left his 
job on March 7 because he no longer believed the President's policies 
reflected the interests of the American people.
  Mr. Kiesling wrote that in our pursuit of war with Iraq, the U.S. had 
squandered the 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.

  Mr. Kiesling wrote:

       Our current course will bring instability and danger, not 
     security.

  But it was this thought that I found most compelling:

       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?

  This central question raised by Mr. Kiesling resonates with many 
Americans who feel frustrated and confused by the way the Bush 
Administration is performing on the international stage:

       Why have we failed to persuade more of the world that a war 
     with Iraq is necessary?

  I ask unanimous consent that Mr. Kiesling's full letter of 
resignation, as it appears in yesterday's Washington Post, be printed 
in the Congressional Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                         The Diplomat's Goodbye

                                                 February 27, 2003
       Dear Mr. Secretary: I am writing you to submit my 
     resignation from the Foreign

[[Page S3401]]

     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 [Ed. note: Latin for ``Let them hate 
     so long as they fear,'' thought to be a favorite saying of 
     Caligula] 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.

                          ____________________