THE PLANK OCTOBER 29, 2009
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
Andrew Exum flags a Washington Post commenter who took a pretty dim view of the Post's front-pager yesterday about Matthew Hoh, the civilian official in Afghanistan who resigned to protest America's presence there.
First, I am currently serving in a PRT in Iraq. I trained with Matt in northern Virginia in April of this past year before we both moved on to our respective assignments. Matt is a smart young man who has honorably served his country, but by no means was or is he an expert on counterinsurgency, Afghan tribal culture, or U.S. strategic policy.
Second-- this article is riddled with inaccuracies to an extent that almost shocks me, and really makes me question its intent and veracity, coming as it does at a critical time in the debate over Afghan policy.
Matt Hoh is NOT a Foreign Service Officer. This basic fact, central to the article and its headline, is wrong, despite the wording in his letter.
Matt is a "3161" State Department employee, a special category of temporary appointments brought on for 12 month assignments in certain areas of expertise-- engineering, ag, business, rule of law, etc. Some may sign on for a second 12-month tour.
This is a very different thing than being an FSO-- a commissioned, career diplomat who is a generalist and is appointed not as a result of an online job application and single interview (sometimes over the phone), but after a series of competitive oral, written, and physical exams.
Referring to Matt as a "U.S. Official" is about as accurate as referring to a postal employee as a U.S. official.
Hoh seems to have taken a brave risk motivated by his conscience. If this person's complaints are true, you do have to wonder if the media is a little over-eager to celebrate such an event. (Not for ideological reasons, but for sensational ones.) I'll keep an eye out to see whether the Post responds.
3 comments
Was that Afghanistan Dissident Overhyped? I'll say yes, no and maybe. But then one can say that about everything we read in the media about Afghanistan, right? Every once in a while you should set aside an hour or so and watch a documentary on Area 51. It truly helps to put in perspective the enormous gap between what we read in the press about "matters of national security" and what is actually happening instead. But, sure, it's always fun pretending we are qualified to talk about it. You know, in an informed and intelligent manner. george
- iambiguous
October 29, 2009 at 4:29pm
The fact that Hoh is not an FSO makes his commentary no less compelling. He is/was a USMC officer, and I'd listen to them before listening to State pukes any day. No one knows everything about the way forward in Afghanistan, only that we have real interests in the region that must be protected/furthered. Whether 40,000 more soldiers is the best way to do that is the question of the day, and I wish the POTUS would make a decision - SOON! He owes it to the 68,000 soldiers already there -enough with voting present.
- butchie b
October 29, 2009 at 5:20pm
"....only that we have real interests in the region that must be protected/furthered." g: Yeah? Define "we", define "interests"; and then note all the ways they are connected. I suspect that by "we" you mean "The American people"; and by "interests" you mean some vague catch-all mongrelism like "national security". Unless, of course, I'm wrong. george
- iambiguous
October 29, 2009 at 5:51pm