ARMY PROPONENT NEWS
(June 1997)

This Quarter's article is not an emotional issue such as our last one on Promotions/Selection Rates. Nonetheless, we'll cover a FAO subject that I'd never seen before my arrival at the Pentagon; the "unofficial" History of the FAO Program. Hope you find it as interesting as I. Good reading.

The Early Years. In 1947, the Army recognized the advent of a new era after World War II required specialists in foreign regions. The first effort was the Language and Area Training Program (LATP). This Program was open to combat arms officers and trained them in a foreign language; initial focus: Western Europe, Japan. It was both extremely small and selective. Sometime prior to 1950, training was expanded to include graduate school in foreign policy or international studies. In 1953, LATP was renamed the Foreign Area Specialist (FAS) Program and expanded to include the rest of the world, except Australia, Great Britain, New Zealand and Canada. The Program doubled in size (from 100 officers to about 200). Two years later, the Military Assistance Officer (MAO) Program was established to support the Army's commitment to the international security assistance field. The MAO training program included some regional training, repetitive assignments within the target region and a course in security assistance administration. Only basic language training was considered necessary within the new specialty. MAO never had more than 150 officers.

Both FAS and MAO predate the establishment of a military intelligence career specialty and during this earlier period, largely filled the Army's needs for strategic intelligence analysts. This is an material issue as the Intelligence Corps never succeeded in completely supplanting either FAS or MAO in this arena. In April 1973, the FAS and MAO Programs were consolidated into the newly designated Foreign Area Officer (FAO) Program. Training was only slightly expanded to include a "six-month basic training course" at the JFK Center as FAOs served as Army/ Defense Attaches, Pol-Mil Analysts, and Security Assistance, Psyop and Civil Affairs officers. At the time of consolidation, the new Program numbered about 200 officers and was still small enough to be governed by exception for personnel purposes. However, as the value of these highly trained staff officers became more apparent to commands around the world, the demand for their services went up exponentially and the capability of the Army to train and manage the specialty became a real problem. Thus,...

The Enhanced FAO Program. In the early 1980s, increasing requirements for FAOs had driven the Army to accessing far more officers than could be trained, given the limited resources committed to the Program. Specifically, 364 Majors had been accessed into the Program each year since 1980 but only 90 of these officers received language training, 75 received ICT and 60 graduate school. Complaints from the CINCs and Defense Agencies about declining officer qualifications increased. They demanded more FAOs but only if fully trained. Different initiatives by different players were the inaugural reactions to the complaints. In late 1982, the Proponent (ODCSOPS-DA) set up a "one-stop shopping" effort at Ft. Bragg; no ICT provided. Soon after these new "one-stop" FAOs (plus their contemporaries with little to no formal training) hit the street, the fault finding by the CINCs and Defense Agencies soon reappeared.

The CSA, GEN Wickam and the VCSA, GEN Thurmon , became directly involved by Fall 1984 and directed the ACSI (LTG Odom) and the DCSOPS (LTG Mehaffy) fix this Program. Also, GEN Richardson, TRADOC, was a player in this issue. Their efforts culminated in a decision briefing to the CSA in Spring 1985 recommending an "Enhanced" FAO Program be adopted. The sole remaining point of discord was who controlled the Proponent, OACSI or ODCSOPS.

Key Points of the Enhanced FAO Program. Accessions of FAOs would be reduced to 120 per year. Each FAO would be fully trained -- language, ICT and grad school; note: only one part could be waived. FAO candidates, possessing one language, would be trained in a second language, if feasible. ICT was to be carefully structured under the supervision of the Army attach‚. Whenever possible, this training would include attendance at a host general staff college. Graduate schools were to be limited to the best in each field. The Proponent would create a list of high quality, not especially high cost, schools in each region annually. No FAOs would receive PhD education. FA 48 would be managed as a dual track specialty. FAOs would serve only in their basic branch or FAO positions. Changes in future training inputs (increases or decreases) would be examined via periodic Functional Area Assessments and based upon Army requirements at O-6.

CSA Decisions. GEN Wickam approved the entire "Enhanced" FAO Program and directed its implementation and funding. He directed the "one-stop shopping" at Bragg be terminated. OACSI and ODCSOPS would continue to operate separate but coordinating offices concerned with FAO. ODCSOPS, however, retained overall Proponency with OACSI concentrating on FAO language and grad school. In 1986, these offices were combined under ODCSOPS, DAMO-SSF, as the current FAO Proponent Office. Of note, since the training left Bragg and the Proponency stayed at ODCSOPS, not transferred to TRADOC, the CSA decided to sustain a shortened FAO Course with annually reevaluations. By 1986, this revamped course had become the FAO Orientation Course conducted at DLIFLC, Monterey, CA.

Changes Over Time. As with any policy or program, "stuff" just inevitably changes over time. So it has been with the FAO Program and Proponent. For example, the realignment between the former Western Europe and USSR/Eastern Europe Areas in 1991 or the Jan 1995 official approval of Single Tracked FAOs. Plus, training waivers are not allowed. Not to bore with detail, see DA PAM 600-3, Chapter 40 (FA 48) and you'll see exactly what our Program does today. It's just four and a half pages chalk-full of info. A good read. Also, belonging to our Association and working with your Assignment and Proponent managers are always a safe bet. But, let's get back to the changes. We do have significant challenges and most deal with money. Grad school starts, language refresher and ICT travel dollars are tight. Requirements for serving FAOs are increasing. This is doubly difficult in a "zero sum" growth environment. So the Army ends up with people shortfalls/mismatches.

Today's FAOs. Remember, since 1947 the FAO has been an integral part of our Army. This will not change in the 21st Century. As the Chief of Staff of the Army, Gen Reimer, says, "FAOs perform a critical function for our Army and our nation. They always have and I think they are even more important during this period of our history." He continues, "I remain convinced that a healthy FAO Program is absolutely vital if we are to reshape the world in the 21st Century. I am proud of the Army Program and will work hard to ensure that it is as good as we can make it." Though it is obvious by the sentences above, in conclusion, FAOs have and will continue to play a major role in U.S. foreign policy with the full support of the CSA. We might be small in number but we play large in the world politic. I hope this "unofficial" History of the FAO Program helps give a little more perspective of our ever-changing Program.

Regards.

Chuck Doroski, COL, Proponent Chief

1997, Foreign Area Officer Association
Springfield, Virginia
Maintained by LTC Steve Gotowicki.
http://www.faoa.org