February 15, 2003 - International Herald Tribune: In the age of terror, diplomatic outposts have become gilded cages

Peace Corps Online: Peace Corps News: Headlines: Peace Corps Headlines - 2003: 02 February 2003 Peace Corps Headlines: February 15, 2003 - International Herald Tribune: In the age of terror, diplomatic outposts have become gilded cages

By Admin1 (admin) on Sunday, February 23, 2003 - 5:24 pm: Edit Post

In the age of terror, diplomatic outposts have become gilded cages





Read and comment on this story from the International Herald Tribune on how U.S. spending on security at the 265 diplomatic outposts has risen sharply. In what one State Department security official called a Herculean effort, physical security improvements have been made to each of those missions.

One security specialist recalls a day around 1970 when, working in the Paris embassy, he was told to find Ambassador Sargent Shriver in a hurry because the French foreign minister wanted him. Steigman, now associate dean at the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service, called the ambassador's residence. "Sarge is somewhere out on the Champs- Elysees," his wife, Eunice Shriver, told Steigman, he says. "He's taken the kids to an arcade." Somehow, they managed to track them down. "There were no guards," he said. "And there was the ambassador and his kids playing pinball."

Fast forward to the mid- 1980s. staying during a Paris visit with the embassy's No. 2 near the Eiffel Tower, someone suggested taking the dog for a walk. Sorry, said his colleague, the guards did not want him even taking the dog into the backyard; someone could lob a grenade. When he did go out, it was in an armor-plated BMW, driven directly from his garage, only when police officers outside gave the all clear. Read the story at:


In the age of terror, diplomatic outposts have become gilded cages*

* This link was active on the date it was posted. PCOL is not responsible for broken links which may have changed.



In the age of terror, diplomatic outposts have become gilded cages

Feb 15, 2003 - International Herald Tribune

Author(s): Brian Knowlton

With fears of terrorist attacks mounting, and resentment of American power roiling in many parts of the world, are U.S. diplomatic outposts safe? Clearly, security has improved in recent years. Just as clearly, much remains to be done. In recent years and particularly since the 1998 terrorist bombings of the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, which killed 224 people U.S. spending on security at the approximately 265 diplomatic outposts has risen sharply. In what one State Department security official called a Herculean effort, physical security improvements have been made to each of those missions.

But at a time when terrorists, as another department official said, "target everything," there is a sense that upgrades cannot wait, anywhere. Improvements have ranged from the installation of concrete walls and shatter-resistant windows and video cameras to the purchase of adjoining properties. Thousands of local guards have been hired, and most embassies now have a federal diplomatic security agent whose job is security planning. Representatives of Foreign Service employees say they are generally satisfied with the progress on security. After the 1998 bombings, a review panel headed by Admiral William Crowe, a former ambassador to Britain, urged much greater spending and more rigorous observance of often-ignored regulations.

There has since been "a dramatic turnaround," said John Naland, president of the American Foreign Service Association, which represents Foreign Service workers. But those who watch the issue remain wary, noting that improvements in security tend to come after horrific events, but then that attention tends to fade. The bombings of the U.S. Embassy and U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983 spurred a period of increased spending on security. But then, until the 1998 bombings, "things got pretty deplorable," Naland said. Many of the recommendations Crowe announced in 1999 were for work proposed by another admiral, Bobby Ray Inman, 14 years earlier.

Still, current spending levels are historically high. Annual appropriations for embassy renovation, fortification and replacement leaped from $739 million in fiscal 2000 to about $1.4 billion since. The fiscal 2004 request from the Bush administration is $1.5 billion, including work at USAID facilities. Land has been acquired around dozens of posts toward a goal of minimum 100-foot setbacks from roads. Anti-ram barriers and blast walls have been erected, and bomb-detection equipment installed. Closed-circuit television systems watch embassy surroundings. All vehicles are now inspected on entering embassy grounds.

And new embassies, like the $54 million one in Ottawa, incorporate the latest security designs. The need for greater setbacks was a central lesson of the African embassy bombings though many thought it had been learned after the Beirut truck bombings of 1983. Where setbacks remain problematic, thicker barriers and blast walls have been installed. In some cases, streets have been closed. Sometimes, the extraordinary security can disrupt the urban streets where embassies are often located. In The Hague this week, local authorities asked that the U.S. Embassy be moved from its long-time location on Lange Voorhout Street, near the busy city center.

The request came after security was tightened at the embassy, and at the consulate in Amsterdam, with added military police and armored vehicles, a jolting sight so near the Parliament building. The Dutch Foreign Ministry indicated that it would not join the call for an embassy move so long as the recent security measures proved temporary. A State Department spokesman said t he was unaware of any similar requests for embassy relocation an expensive process that can take four or five years. Security is not just about buildings, of course, and terror is not just about bombs and bullets. Embassy mail has been screened more carefully since the anthrax scares of 2001.

Equipment against chemical or biological attacks is being sent to all posts, the official said. The State Department has spent considerable money in the past two years evacuating employees and family members from high-threat posts. After spending just over $500,000 to do so in 2000, it spent $3 million on evacuations in 2001 and $2.6 million last year, including evacuations from some embassies in Asia after the nightclub bombings in Bali. At times, the government has been disastrously slow in ordering evacuations, as when Islamic students overran the Tehran Embassy in 1979, taking hostages. But Naland said his group had "absolutely no complaints" about current practices.

Much remains to be done, of course. "There is no place in the world now that is not a target," said Andrew Steigman, a former diplomat. "You have to upgrade everywhere." And tighter embassy security can mean that terrorists look for new, "soft" targets. On March 17, Barbara Green, a U.S. Embassy administrator in Islamabad, was killed along with her teenage daughter and three other people when a man threw hand grenades into a Protestant church frequented by foreigners in the Pakistani capital. And on Oct. 28, Lawrence Foley, a senior USAID diplomat, was shot and killed outside his home in Amman.

The U.S. Embassy in that city is extremely well-fortified. "What we've seen in the last year," Naland said, is that "not only will they attack the weak-link embassy, they'll attack the church or your front yard." Guards have been hired to improve diplomats' residential security. Local police help as well. But as Naland acknowledged, "You can't secure every school, and every church, and every front yard." How dissuasive the tightened embassy security has been is difficult to say. The State Department tallies incidents of violence against overseas U.S. targets, not limited to diplomatic facilities.

The numbers vary drastically, reflecting political events. In 1998, such attacks numbered 20. Then in 1999, amid protests against the NATO bombing of Serbia, the number spiked to 68. The following year it dropped to eight, before doubling in 2001. What is clear is that the world facing modern diplomats is not as simple as it once was. Steigman recalls a day around 1970 when, working in the Paris embassy, he was told to find Ambassador Sargent Shriver in a hurry the French foreign minister wanted him. Steigman, now associate dean at the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service, called the ambassador's residence.

"Sarge is somewhere out on the Champs- Elysees," his wife, Eunice Shriver, told Steigman, he says. "He's taken the kids to an arcade." Somehow, Steigman managed to track them down. "There were no guards," he said. "And there was the ambassador and his kids playing pinball." Fast forward to the mid- 1980s. Steigman, staying during a Paris visit with the embassy's No. 2 near the Eiffel Tower, suggests taking the dog for a walk. Sorry, said his colleague, the guards did not want him even taking the dog into the backyard; someone could lob a grenade. When he did go out, it was in an armor-plated BMW, driven directly from his garage, only when police officers outside gave the all clear.

And security is even more rigid now. "It ain't fun anymore," said Steigman, who went to Georgetown after serving as a deputy assistant secretary of state. Ultimately, the risk of foreign service can never be brought to zero. "When you sign up, you know that there's some danger attached," said Naland. "But we can't do our jobs if we're all sitting back in Washington, D.C."

Click on a link below for more stories on PCOL

Top Stories and Discussion on PCOL
Improvements needed in Volunteer Support ServicesWhere the Peace Corps Bill stands
Dodd's Amended Bill passes in SenateElection 2002:  RPCVs run for office
Peace Corps Volunteers Safe in Ivory CoastA Profile of Gaddi Vasquez
Sargent Shriver and the Politics of Life911:  A Different America
USA Freedom Corps - "paved with good intentions"PCV hostage rescued from terrorists


Top Stories and Discussion on PCOL
GAO reports on Volunteer Safety and SecurityPeace Corps out of Russia?
Help the New Peace Corps Bill pass CongressUSA Freedom Cops TIPS Program
Senior Staff Appointments at Peace Corps HeadquartersFor the Peace Corps Fallen
Senator Dodd holds Hearings on New Peace Corps LegislationThe Debate over the Peace Corps Fund
Why the Peace Corps needs a Fourth GoalThe Peace Corps 40th plus one
The Case for Peace Corps IndependenceThe Controversy over Lariam
The Peace Corps and Homeland SecurityDirector Vasquez meets with RPCVs
RPCV Congressmen support Peace Corps' autonomyPeace Corps Expansion:  The Numbers Game?
When should the Peace Corps return to Afghanistan?Peace Corps Cartoons



Some postings on Peace Corps Online are provided to the individual members of this group without permission of the copyright owner for the non-profit purposes of criticism, comment, education, scholarship, and research under the "Fair Use" provisions of U.S. Government copyright laws and they may not be distributed further without permission of the copyright owner. Peace Corps Online does not vouch for the accuracy of the content of the postings, which is the sole responsibility of the copyright holder.

This story has been posted in the following forums: : Headlines; Peace Corps Directors - Shriver; Safety and Security of Volunteers; Diplomacy

PCOL3091
84

.


Add a Message


This is a public posting area. Enter your username and password if you have an account. Otherwise, enter your full name as your username and leave the password blank. Your e-mail address is optional.
Username:  
Password:
E-mail: