Redefining the Foreign Area Officer's Role: a response

Military Review,  Jan-Feb, 2005  by Robert E. Friedenberg

Tags: CAREER, officer, U.S. Army

• E-mail
• Print
• Link

Vane and Fagundes correctly say a large number of Eurasian FAOs (48E) serve in Germany. Three of the six 48E colonels are serving at EUCOM, which is headquartered in Germany, and six 48Es (three majors, two lieutenant colonels, and one colonel) are assigned to the Marshall Center in Garmisch, which is responsible for supervising most Eurasian FAO trainees. Given the projected number of FAO trainees at the Marshall Center (six to eight slots per year), this might be an excessive number. However, Vane and Fagundes' article implies the high number of 48E officers in EUCOM is because HRC FAO proponents or FAO career managers make unilateral determinations of structure and requirements.

Major or joint commands (in this case EUCOM) determine how many FAOs are assigned and where they will serve. Arguably, the number of 48E FAOs in Germany is larger than necessary and likely will change as Department of Defense (DOD) refocuses priorities and changes are reflected in EUCOM manning documents. (The FAO Branch Chief at the U.S. Army Human Resource Center provided information on the Marshall Center staffing and other Germany Army FAO assignments.)

Vane and Fagundes correctly call for the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and theater commanders to review the number of attache billets within Western Europe. However, when they criticize DIA priorities for attache assignments they include other than Army assignments, such as Navy or Air Force attaches. The criticisms might be valid, but addressing them is beyond the scope of the Army FAO assignments system. Updating manning documents to reflect changing strategic realities is a function of joint commands such as EUCOM or DIA, not Army FAO assignment officers.

I am puzzled why Vane and Fagundes would criticize the current FAO development model as incompatible with the Army policy of dual tracking. Officer Personnel Management System (OPMS)-3 was implemented 7 years ago to end the dual-tracking policy for officers. FAOs now occupy their own career fields, have their own professional development models, and compete against other FAOs for promotion. Without the promotion requirement to serve in operational branch-qualifying assignments, FAOs can serve in jobs that develop them as regional specialists.

The Army must continue to assess the FAO training program and assignments system and make adjustments as required. In the near term, DOD leaders are likely to make significant changes to the organization, training, and resourcing of the military. Army FAO programs must develop to support these changes or risk irrelevance. FAOs who serve in embassies worldwide or on high-level staffs will continue to make great contributions to national security and will make these contributions by developing regional expertise. Developing and maintaining a foreign language capability is a primary skill, not merely an enabler.

COPYRIGHT 2005 U.S. Army CGSC
COPYRIGHT 2008 Gale, Cengage Learning