WHY NOT FAO GENERALS?

COL David O. Smith

I had the opportunity recently to visit the semi-annual FAO Course conducted at DLI in Monterey, CA to speak about both the FAO Association and life as an attaché. Other presentations were given by the FAO Proponent, PERSCOM, and invited guest speakers. It is a superb course, ably coordinated by the Proponent's rep at DLI, COL Manny Fuentes.

However, while listening to these presentations it occurred to me that many speakers were limiting students expectations about a "successful" FAO career. Young FAOs-in-training were told the pyramid is built by determining the number of FAO colonels required by Army manning documents and building downward, that success is defined by promotion to colonel, and that the prospect of for promotion to general officer rank is unrealistic.

Our senior leaders also contribute to this diminished expectation. In the 5 June 2000 issue of the Army Times, GEN Wesley Clark, referring to the skills needed in today's evolving strategic environment, stated, "It's going to take leadership, understanding, cultural sensitivity, language skills, a broad perspective to be able to handle that." He then held up the FAO program as an example of what is both right and wrong with the Army today. "It's the envy of every other service .but if you're an armor officer and you become a FAO, you can forget about becoming an armor officer. So all that sensitivity is lost, and they retire as lieutenant colonels and colonels."

Why do we say this when FAOs have always been promoted to general officer rank. "Vinegar Joe" Stilwell, Maxwell Taylor, Matthew Ridgway and other legendary figures from our past were FAOs in their time. Today, we have two serving general officers on the Board of Governors of your Association; there are several others on active duty as well: Keith Dayton and Kevin Byrnes to name just two.

However, GEN Clark is right on the mark in identifying the skills needed in the future. Why shouldn't there should be FAO general officer slots identified in service manning documents to guarantee that vital FAO skills are not lost prematurely? For example, why shouldn't the J-5 position in each regional command be reserved for FAOs? Same goes for the two Deputy Assistant Director J-5 slots on the Joint Staff. There are potential FAO GO positions in OSD, DIA and the CIA as well. In the Army, three slots easily come to mind--Military Deputy to the Deputy Under Secretary of the Army (International Affairs) and the Director and Assistant Director for Strategy, Plans, and Policy--and certainly there are opportunities for FAO GOs in DCSINT and in MI field operating agencies. The Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps all have similar positions.

We should push strongly to raise the peak of the FAO pyramid to include general officer and flag positions. And we must recognize that the best FAOs have a legitimate shot at stars. We are limited only by our mindset. As our Air Force brethren are fond of saying, AIM HIGH!

2000, Foreign Area Officer Association
Springfield, Virginia
Maintained by LTC Steve Gotowicki.
http://www.faoa.org