Only 3 State Dept Personnel Killed in Iraq War
By: Administrative Account | Source: CNSNews.com
November 9, 2007 6:00PM EST

By Randy Hall
CNSNews.com Staff Writer/Editor
November 09, 2007

(CNSNews.com) - Despite claims by some diplomats that forced service in Iraq amounts to a "potential death sentence," only three State Department employees have been killed in Iraq since the U.S.-led coalition invaded the country more than four years ago.

By way of comparison, more than 3,800 members of the all-volunteer U.S. military have been killed in Iraq.

State Department spokesman Karl Duckworth told Cybercast News Service on Thursday that since the war in Iraq began on March 20, 2003, only three American Foreign Service employees have been killed there, though one additional diplomat from the U.S. died of natural causes.

More than 1,500 State Department personnel have served in Iraq during the past four and a half years, which gives the department's contingent in that country a mortality rate of 0.2 percent, or one casualty every 18 months.

Those statistics were originally brought to light during last week's controversy that began when the State Department announced that it had filled only 200 of the 248 posts that would begin new one-year terms in Iraq during summer 2008.

As a result, more than 200 Foreign Service officers (FSOs) were identified as "prime candidates" for the unclaimed positions, and they could be ordered to serve there under threat of dismissal.

That led to a tumultuous "town hall" meeting at the department's headquarters in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 31, when about 300 diplomats gathered to disagree with the decision since the staff sent to Iraq would serve at the embassy in the "Green Zone" in Baghdad or on Provincial Reconstruction Teams in outlying provinces.

"Incoming is coming in every day, rockets are hitting the Green Zone," said Jack Crotty, a senior FSO who once worked with NATO forces. "It's one thing if someone believes in what's going on over there and volunteers, but it's another thing to send someone over there on a forced assignment.

"I'm sorry, but basically, that's a potential death sentence, and you know it," he said. "Who will raise our children if we are dead or seriously wounded?"

Nevertheless, Foreign Service Director General Harry Thomas told the group that the decision to fill "directed assignments" with non-volunteers - which has not been done since the Vietnam War in the 1960s - would stand.

The following day, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice sent an e-mail to department personnel expressing her sadness at the need for forced assignments but asking the diplomats to do their duty to their country regardless of the circumstances.

Since then, 15 department volunteers have volunteered to fill the empty posts in Iraq, while the controversy has continued to generate a number of strong reactions.

On the official State Department blog, John Matel, a career FSO presently serving in the Al Anbar province of Iraq, wrote: "To my vexed and overwrought colleagues, I say take a deep breath and calm down."

"Calling Iraq a death sentence is just way over the top," he said. "I volunteered to come here aware of the risks but confident that I will come safely home, as do the vast majority of soldiers and Marines, who have a lot riskier jobs than we FSOs do.

"I personally dislike the whole idea of forced assignments, but we do have to do our jobs," Matel stated. "All of us volunteered for this kind of work, and we have enjoyed a pretty sweet lifestyle most of our careers."

On Nov. 6, Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), ranking GOP member of the House Armed Services Committee and a candidate for president in the 2008 campaign, delivered a letter to President Bush asking that the diplomats who refuse to serve in Iraq be replaced with wounded veterans from the Walter Reed and Bethesda hospitals.

"It's a sad day for the State Department when you can't get 45 volunteers to go into Iraq - and even into the 'Green Zone,' which is fortified - and the U.S. Marine Corps is 180,000 strong and all volunteers," Hunter said.

But "if I have to go out and recruit the veterans [to replace the reluctant State Department officers], I'll do it myself!" he said.

Also on Tuesday, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) sent a letter to Rice calling it "unconscionable" to consider disciplining State Department envoys who refuse to serve in Iraq. Instead, Rice should address the concerns raised about "the need for additional support, training and diplomatic security."

Then on Thursday, the Associated Press reported that the State Department had filed a request for supplemental funding of $1.5 billion to protect U.S. diplomats and a growing number of reconstruction teams in Iraq.

Along with increased money for three private firms that provide security to envoys in Iraq, the funding would also pay for armored vehicles, bulletproof vests, ammunition, X-ray machines, bomb-sniffing dogs, barriers to prevent attacks by suicide bombers and overhead shields to deflect mortar attacks.

Ironically, the budget document was sent to Congress on Oct. 22, a week before the current controversy began.

Make media inquiries or request an interview with Randy Hall.

Subscribe to the free CNSNews.com daily E-brief.

E-mail a comment or news tip to Randy Hall.

Send a Letter to the Editor about this article.