WARY OF WARRIOR-DIPLOMATS!
Joseph Tullbane, President, FAOA
A number of old FAOs read the many articles about the "SOF Vision 2020" with
considerable confusion -- the title "Warrior-Diplomat" in the document looked
suspiciously like the traditional title "Soldier-Statesman" that has been applied to the
members of the FAO community for the last twenty or more years. On the one hand, it
was refreshing to see that GEN Shelton (CINC, US Special Operations Command)
used the above title, because it showed that yet another senior Army General Officer
recognizes the importance and value of high-level, military-to-military interaction with
foreign armed forces. Unfortunately, his implied equation of Special Forces officers to
FAOs largely missed the mark.
I must admit that the Special Forces Career Specialty does have similarities to
FAO, but so do both the Military Intelligence Career Specialty and the Psychological
Operations Functional Area. In each case these specialties find areas of commonality
with facets of the FAO mission, but as the opposite sides of the same coin. The
training, growth, and target audiences of each differs in critically important ways from
FAO, as well as from each other.
"Green Berets" and FAOs both regularly operate in the international
environment, on the sovereign territories of foreign nations, and to do this they require
a basic grounding in indigenous languages. SF officers are warfighters trained for
warfighter missions. They seek to influence, advise, train, and interact with foreign
military forces and populations at the "grass roots" level. While they are well-briefed
on the political and military situations prior to a mission, they require minimal detailed
understanding of the regional environment. They are warriors performing necessary
missions, but it is a mistake to call them "Warrior-Diplomats."
Operating at the other end of the operational spectrum is the FAO. His/her work
in the realms of security assistance and attach‚ work demands that he/she bring
military background and training to bear on problems of a national character. In order
to do this, an in-depth strategic level understanding of the target country and its place
within the regional context are essential. While the SF Officer trains people for service
in the field, the FAO uses his/her military expertise, operating in the halls of government
-- translating Army and US national policy objectives into reality through interaction with
the national administrations of other nations. Personal acquaintances that have
matured into friendships through years of contact allow FAOs to be successful in this
complicated, and often delicate, mission.
Because of the multi-faceted requirements inherent in the field, it takes years to
create a fully qualified FAO (many SF officers make fine candidates for FAO and after
additional training serve as FAOs later in their careers). Repetitive tours of duty within
their target regions build on the basic experiences in FAO language training, graduate
education in regional expertise, and in-country training. Both Green Berets and FAOs
are necessary and increasingly important, as the Army attempts to promote regional
stability through increased engagement. I believe, however, that in comparing the two,
the differences far outweigh the similarities. Frankly, I am very wary of the term
"WARRIOR-DIPLOMAT."
1997, Foreign Area Officer Association
Springfield, Virginia
Maintained by LTC Steve
Gotowicki
http://www.faoa.org