A few weeks ago there was a flurry of news coverage about the State Department's Office of Inspector General (OIG) report on Hillary Clinton's email saga. The media coverage, although widespread, was not thorough and somewhat fuzzy. As expected, the whole thing faded away within a week. It was as if the news media planned it that way, reporting that although some of the verbiage found in the OIG report was damaging, it was still up to the forthcoming FBI report to decide whether any serious security breach was made. Conveniently, some sentences were quoted selectively out of the OIG report, never giving a complete picture. Of course, the fact that the OIG has no arrest or indictment power or function was not mentioned. OIG only investigates and reports its findings, nothing more. If action needs to be taken, then it is up to the Justice Department to carry it out. Therefore, it is the FBI that should be doing any filing of charges or indictments, which more than likely will not take place, if ever, perhaps only after the forthcoming elections!
All U.S. government agencies and the military have their Inspector General's offices, usually referred to simply as the "IG." The IG in the military and other agencies is not a popular organization, it is, for lack of better comparison, is looked upon like the much disliked Internal Affairs of Police Departments (which is Police Departments' version of the IG!). Anyone watching TV police dramas is well aware of how the IA or Internal Affairs is seen by most rank and file police, it is disliked, indeed hated by some. The IG may not be seen quite the same way by the various federal agencies and the military, but nevertheless, it is not exactly popular. In contrast, the State Department's Inspector General's Office, the OIG, is looked upon in a totally different light by State Department employees, both Foreign Service and domestic. It is not seen as the "IA" of the State Department, although it does perform that function.
The main purpose of the OIG is to inspect and determine if a particular office is performing its function correctly and efficiently. When something is found to be incorrect or improperly performed, then it is pointed out in a report and suggestions are made as to how to correct the situation. The OIG is thought of as a "constructive criticism" organization, one that inspects embassies and consulates abroad and various State Department offices domestically, and corrects any improper procedures and improves the function and operation of that embassy/consulate/office. It is, by far the most rank heavy office in the federal government.
The OIG is made up of Inspection Teams. Each team is composed of six to eight members ranging in pay grades from the lowest rank of GS-14 to the team leader who is of Ambassadorial rank (equivalent to a 3 or 4 star General). Normally, half of the team is composed of Foreign Service (FS) personnel, and the other half of General Schedule (GS) personnel. The Foreign Service personnel are in grades FS-1 (0-6/Colonel) to Senior Foreign Service (1 to 4 star). The GS personnel are usually all GS-15s (same as FS-1 or 0-6/Colonel) with occasional GS-14 as the lowest ranking person on the team. So, as you can see, there is an awful lot of rank on an OIG Inspection Team. If they were to wear military ranks, they would be all Colonels and Generals! A job with the OIG is something that is sought, not avoided like the IA jobs with the Police Departments.
In 1993, after completing my academic year at Harvard's Center for International Affairs as a Fellow, I went to work for the OIG. I was advised to seek a job with OIG by my career counselor who thought it would expand my knowledge of how the State Department operates, prepare me for bigger and better things, or so he thought. Within a month after leaving Harvard, we barely had time to find a house in Virginia before I was off on my first inspection trip overseas. I worked for a total of 18 months for the OIG and inspected embassies and consulates in Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia on my first inspection trip with side trip inspections to Seychelles and Mauritius. Returned for a couple of months only to go off to inspect Panama, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Guatemala. Returned again for a few months of rest, then stayed in Washington to inspect various offices within the State Department, before I got the assignment to Cairo and left the States six months early. I had to request the OIG to let me go six months early, since my assignment to OIG was for two years.
During my 18 months with the OIG, I learned an awful lot about how the various embassies and their offices operated and how the many offices within the State Department worked. Probably the most important things that I learned in my time with OIG was what not to do! In all, it was a very valuable experience and paid dividends for me. The State Department being the kind of an organization that it is, never strongly criticizes anybody, unless the mistake or particular act is especially egregious! There were many instances where I thought our final report on a particular office or post overseas was too "gentle," too soft! But I learned that we simply did not bash anybody over the head, we rather "nudged" them. If we did say something strong, then the offense or the mistake must have been really bad!
Just reading the bits and pieces contained in the OIG report on Hillary that the news media selectively picked, I can tell you that by State Department standards, it was a scathing report, not just a career killer, but something for which serious consequences were called for. The very fact Hillary has not yet been made to pay for those serious breaches of security is absolutely disgusting. Whoever said that the rich and powerful in this country are treated the same way as the rest has been either smoking funny stuff or living in another country! Hillary so far has gotten away with an offense for which any other State Department employee would not have only been fired, but jailed as well!
Let me give you an example of how unforgiving and harsh the State Department can be to those who it thinks have broken the law or trust. A very good friend of mine, a brilliant Foreign Service Officer with an outstanding career was unceremoniously fired not only from his job but from the Foreign Service for what the Department considered a breach of trust and unprofessional conduct! At the time, my friend was the US Consul General in Rome, not an insignificant position. He held the job and the personal rank of military equivalent of a 2 star general. Rome is considered to be one of our plumb posts and is sought after by many. It is also a very popular place for our congressmen and other high officials to come visiting on boondoggles. It was particularly bad during my friend's time in Rome. There was a constant flow of "CODELs," Congressional Delegations to Rome, stretching the embassies resources to a breaking point.
After one particularly tiring and annoying CODEL visit, my friend, in an unofficial email to a friend, voiced his frustrations about the situation and did say a few unkindly things about our illustrious Congressmen. The email was sent through the Department's unclassified server which allows employees to use it for personal emails. However, like all communications in and out of State Department and overseas posts, it was monitored. His email reached the desk of the front office of management and he was promptly, unceremoniously fired. He received a call from Washington within days telling him to pack his bags and leave Rome for processing out of the State Department employment! After more than 25 years of loyal and superior service, my friend who had served wherever he was asked to go, was simply fired for what the Department called, "unprofessional language and conduct." He did not commit a security violation! He simply said things that someone didn't like! I am not saying what he did was right, only that his slip was nowhere near the level of seriousness as Hillary's!
I know of number of other cases where Foreign Service Officers were fired for acts that were not anywhere near the seriousness of Hillary's email escapades! Yeah, I guess if you are rich and famous, you can get away with stuff that the rest of us common folks would be jailed for doing. You can also give a speech on inequality (what irony!) wearing a $12,495 Armani jacket and get only mild coverage for a day or so, essentially getting a pass from the news media!
No comments:
Post a Comment