A View from the Field: What Makes a Good FAO: A 19-Year Perspective
By Colonel James E. McDonough, U.S. Army
We Foreign Area Officers are a unique group. It is our responsibility to represent our country and our services around the globe, often as the singular face of the United States military. Imperative duties are inherent to our profession: first and foremost, to serve with dignity and steadfast military bearing; second, to communicate effectively; third, to have in-depth knowledge on our service, broad knowledge about our military and the interagency, and both depth and breadth of knowledge about our assigned countries or region; and finally, to champion our nation and its causes.
Shouldering these responsibilities is a significant challenge, yet it is the burden we accepted when we elected to become FAOs. Unlike artillery officers, pilots, and ship engineers, the skill-sets we must master as FAOs are not easily defined. Aside from foreign language proficiency (a hard skill about which many have written and thus I will not cover here) all other FAO proficiencies are soft skills. So what other skills distinguish us as FAOs? How do we develop them, and what standards do we keep? I share my perspectives from over 19 years as a FAO.
Military Bearing and Professional Dignity
First impressions mean something, as do second impressions and every subsequent impression. This goes without saying, so why state it? FAOs are first and foremost soldiers, airmen, sailors, and marines. We have a duty to maintain the standards of our services. We don’t shed this responsibility when we become FAOs and if anything, we must set for ourselves even higher standards since we are often the sole face of our great military. That means that in physical appearance and manner we cannot afford to be anything less than the American military professional. This is our first duty as FAOs.
We FAOs are front and center in the places we are assigned, and our personal military bearing reflects whether or not the U.S. military is fit to fight. American military prowess is more than an ability to plan complex operations and deliver high-end capabilities. It is also the ability to go toe-to-toe with and vanquish a peer competitor. Physically, our service men and women must be ready to go long hours, on empty bellies, during cold winter nights. We cannot expect less from ourselves, and physical fitness is a measure of that aptitude – though not the only one. It is never enough for a FAO to simply pass a tape-test every six months. Triple-chins, withered arms, and pot bellies beg aggression from our foes, and disillusion our allies about our strength as a nation. A FAO’s physical appearance, if not physical prowess, must reflect that the U.S. military isn’t a force any nation should want to face in battle.
It is also important that FAOs represent our military’s culture of discipline. In appearance we do that through our personal grooming and proper wear of the uniform. FAOs who go "rogue" when they leave the direct oversight of their services disgrace themselves and our military by violating regulations such as by growing beards during language school or modifying their uniforms when on embassy duty. Our services expect us to represent their highest standards, and most especially when we are away from the flag pole. A FAO who ignores standards sends the message that our military lacks discipline. We know from history that it is discipline that distinguishes an army from rabble and the soldier from the thug. Friends and foes often judge our nation’s readiness and discipline based upon our appearance. FAOs who present themselves as physically fit, properly groomed, and appropriately dressed indicate that America is a hard target, and when we look like a hard target our foes will turn away.
Effective Communication
Good communication is a skill valued by all branches, but it is the way in which we communicate with foreigners that defines us as FAOs. FAOs walk the fine line between diplomatic politeness and unseemly flattery. We combine this with slow and deliberate speech, avoiding unnecessary language complexities. Communication is a soft skill that too few of our peers get right, and many do so poorly as to cause a lot of work in diffusing unnecessary tensions or walking back untenable commitments. Here are a few pointers about effectively communicating.
Speak slowly and use plain language when with a foreign audience. While we will routinely communicate with foreigners with better English skills than the average American, the nuances of our language can cause misunderstandings even with highly conversant English-speakers. Mostly we must communicate with foreigners who have moderate to low English-language ability. Avoid the use of complex vocabulary, slang and acronyms. Like a good machine-gunner, FAOs use short, well-aimed bursts to communicate with non-native English speakers.
Use polite language, both verbally and physically, and always render basic courtesies such as deference to rank, age, or position. Polite and respectful communication signals American professionalism, and triggers respect even from adversaries.
Occasionally smile and show interest when communicating face-to-face. Don’t be a sap, but an occasional smile disarms most people, and being a good listener shows respect for others’ ideas, interests, and concerns.
Don’t put on airs. We have no need to be pompous when representing the United States. An American major often holds more intrinsic authority than a foreign general, yet we need never flout it. A good example of how not to communicate can been seen in the war documentary, “Restrepo.” In the film there is a clip when a young American officer is seen waving his finger at an Afghan elder as he repeatedly uses profanity. Don’t do this. Communication of this type is disrespectful and contemptuous, reinforces the image of the ugly American, and alienates both friend and foe. Be culturally aware, confident, and adjust your body language and vocabulary appropriately to the situation, always in a professional manner
Show disapproval, anger, or even disgust when appropriate but always in a dignified manner. We’re not stooges or sycophants, and at times we must firmly and even threateningly communicate America’s positions. Once as a lieutenant colonel in charge of a small delegation, a senior foreign general accused the United States of behaving no better than the Soviet Union merely because he wasn’t getting what he wanted from us. His accusation was disrespectful not only to me but also to our nation. We were in fact providing his nation significant support in the face of Russian aggression. With firm countenance I cut him short, sternly rejected his accusation, and threatened to end the meeting and report his demeanor to our leadership. His tone changed instantly and mutual respect was restored.
FAOs who understand the above, who can communicate politely, simply and dispassionately, have generally mastered the art of communication. It is our foremost skill.
Professional Knowledge
A FAO’s knowledge is yet another soft and perishable skill that is intuitively measurable. We are either proficient in our knowledge or we’re not, and our leaders will know it and judge our value by it. Our U.S. leadership, both military and civilian, and our foreign counterparts will prize our FAO abilities when we display depth of knowledge about our service and region, breadth of knowledge about our military, and familiarity with the U.S. interagency. Shortcomings in our knowledge in any of these areas is unacceptable. We must be sufficiently prepared to fulfill the full scope of our duties.
FAOs must have depth of knowledge about our own service. That means staying Army green, Air Force blue, and Navy white. Our services are forever adapting to new missions and challenges, and this stresses our ability to remain current in our knowledge. Since I left the infantry back in 1999, I’ve spent more time in the field with Romanian, Hungarian, and Polish soldiers than with American soldiers; more time away from U.S. Army headquarters than in one. Yet I owe it to the Army to know its latest doctrines, capabilities, and culture. We’re no good to our services if our service-knowledge has passed an expiration date. To keep up we must add these tasks:
Read! We must study our service as if we’re entry-level cadets. I read Army Magazine, the War College Quarterly, and even that tabloid periodical known as the Army Times. Books are mandatory, especially those about recent military campaigns and written by soldiers with first-hand experience. I even browse a dry field manual now and again.
Seek out opportunities to join your service “in the field.” We can do this by hitching a ride with an Observer Controller Team at a combat training center, or conducting a ship visit when one is in port. Periodically we can spend a week at a service headquarters, or with an operational unit. And we should volunteer for unaccompanied tours and deployments.
Live vicariously through old colleagues. By communicating with those who are still serving in their basic branches we are able to benefit from their experiences and knowledge. This method of keeping up, perhaps more than any of the above, will help us to keep the pulse of our service’s culture and changes.
FAOs are the military’s regional experts, and our reputation as “strategic scouts” is well-earned. Instead of regurgitating the volumes already written about this knowledge base, I offer a few words of wisdom about developing regional expertise.
Read everything but focus especially on a country’s or region’s history, credible media about its current events, and source reporting from the intelligence agencies and the Department of State. With respect to history, most citizens of other nations have long memories – much longer than Americans – which affects contemporary policy. To understand a culture we must know its history. A good FAO is also a historian.
Build experiences through contact. There is no greater value for a FAO than having direct contact with foreign leaders, staffers, soldiers, and regular every-day people. It is the accumulation of these contacts that build upon our understanding of the operating environment and culture. Far too many of our embassy colleagues do this poorly, preferring to stay behind their desks and venturing out only for pre-arranged meetings with senior-level persons. A FAO’s aperture must be wider which mandates that we expose ourselves to the real-world and everyone in it, not only the guy in the business suit, though they too have their value.
Take calculated risks. We’re not paid to be foolish or risk adverse. I’ve pushed the envelope on occasion in order to become better informed about my environment, or to obtain information that benefits the United States. An example is testing a border control point between Moldova and Transnistria. I wasn’t reckless and didn’t push the point of a muzzle, but I did want to identify at what point the muzzle would be raised. Such experiences improve our stock as FAOs, and hone our awareness about our environment. Our profession necessitates that we occasionally take chances to both meet our nation’s objectives and also to establish credibility with our allies, partners, and foes alike. Making calculated risks is a right-of-passage for a FAO.
Breadth of knowledge about our military is also a requirement for a FAO. Without an understanding of the totality of our American military we might as well join the State Department! Though we need not be experts in other services’ capabilities, doctrine, and traditions, nor can we be ignorant of the basics. Our ambassadors and foreign counterparts see only that we wear an Armed Forces uniform, not merely that we are Army, Marine, or Navy. They rightfully expect us to be subject matter experts for the entirety of the Department of Defense, and so FAOs who are worth their salt must aggressively fill the gaps in their broader military knowledge.
Finally, it’s pertinent for FAOs to gain familiarity with the U.S. interagency, and especially those non-military branches of American government that are at play within our assigned countries and regions. This includes not only the Department of State and the Central Intelligence Agency, but may often include the Drug Enforcement Administration, Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. AID, the Department of Energy, and others. As our civil leaders rely on us to have broad knowledge about our military, our military leaders expect us to be familiar with the vast range of non-military efforts that compliment military activities. FAOs bridge the civil-military divide better than anyone.
Championing Our Nation
Stephen Decatur is quoted as saying, “Our country! In her intercourse with foreign nations, may she always be right; but our country, right or wrong.” We FAOs are our nation’s sentinels, and it is our duty to defend America’s values and character, and to champion her interests. We can do neither without a clear understanding of our government and history.
By any measure we are a self-critical people who are always reflecting upon our actions and finding fault with them. Such ability to criticize our government, its leaders, and our American society is a wonderful entitlement of American citizenship. Yet FAOs must be weary of errant cynicism for the Unites States has much to be proud of. I challenge the reader to pick up our Constitution and read it at least once each year, lest we forget the beacon of light it has been to mankind. Through the Constitution our government's powers are masterfully balanced, our liberties guaranteed, and our society efficiently ordered. I further challenge the reader to read American history for it abounds with accomplishments and contributions to mankind.
FAOs, more than officers of any other profession of arms, must be knowledgeable of the ways in which American leadership, values, enterprise, and ingenuity have benefited our citizens and the peoples of the world. There are nations and people aplenty that wish to knock our United States from its perch. Our enemies are skilled at attacking our nation's reputation, and FAOs must have the knowledge, skill and moral courage to stand up for our great country. In our history we’ve done a number of things wrongly or poorly, yet we’re not apologists for our nation’s mistakes. Instead, we can state in complete honesty that the United States strives to be a force for good. It is a FAO’s duty to educate foreigners about the awesome power that is granted American citizens to improve upon our condition and to right our nation’s offenses.
It has been my magnificent privilege to serve our nation as a Foreign Area Officer. I have learned that this privilege demands great responsibility. Our knowledge about our military and regions must be comprehensive. Where our knowledge falls short, we must aggressively pursue the information and experiences that will expand it. While serving at embassies, foreign ministries, and allied headquarters we must be stalwart examples of our services’ traditions of professionalism and military bearing. A FAO’s worth is validated by excellence in these things. Never should we sully our nation’s reputation in the eyes of our allies, colleagues, or adversaries through our inaction, indifference or ignorance. We are the first line of defense, and as long as we maintain these proficiencies FAOs will be valued. The FAO profession is a noble profession. Let us strive to serve our nation with distinction.
About the Author
Colonel McDonough is the U.S. Army Attaché in Warsaw, Poland. He has served the Army for 26 years to include various overseas assignments in Germany, Hungary, Italy, Romania, and Turkey. He led a Combined Joint Interagency Task Force in Afghanistan that targeted the nexus of narcotics trafficking, government corruption, and the insurgency, and also served as the Chief of Exercises for U.S. Army Europe.