Showing posts with label Consular Work. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Consular Work. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

US Embassy Manama Relocates Employees and Dependents in #Bahrain

Manama and Bahrain.Image via WikipediaThe State Department issued a new Travel Alert for Bahrain dated January 23, 2012 which warns U.S. citizens to the potential for unrest in the country. Security concerns due to traffic disruptions caused by spontaneous demonstrations also caused the US Embassy in Manama to relocate its employees and family members to different neighborhoods in the capital city. Excerpt:

All travelers to Bahrain face increased scrutiny from Bahraini authorities, and the Government of Bahrain has refused to allow some U.S. citizens permission to enter Bahrain. The airport remains open and operational.


Spontaneous and sometimes violent anti-government demonstrations occur in some neighborhoods, particularly at night and on weekends. These demonstrations have included blockades of major highways, trash can fires, and establishment of unofficial checkpoints. Participants have thrown rocks and Molotov cocktails and used various other homemade weapons. The Ministry of Interior maintains official checkpoints in some areas and routinely uses tear gas, stun grenades, and other crowd control measures against demonstrators. The violent clashes between security forces and demonstrators can make travel in and around Bahrain dangerous without advance warning.


The U.S. Embassy restricts its employees from traveling to specific areas and advises all U.S. citizens to do the same. The recent increase in violent demonstrations along the Budaiya Highway corridor has led to traffic disruptions, effectively restricting travel for those living in the area. The resulting inability to leave one's home for an extended period poses significant safety and security concerns. As a result, Embassy employees and their dependents are being relocated to different neighborhoods. We continue to urge U.S. citizens to follow the latest security guidance and to avoid demonstrations. Please check our Demonstration Notices where the latest information and security guidance along with the latest map outlining the recommended areas of travel can be found.


There are no indications that Westerners or U.S. citizens are being targeted directly, but recent isolated examples of anti-U.S. sentiment have been seen on the streets and U.S. flags have occasionally been burned during demonstrations. U.S. citizens are urged to remain alert to local security developments and to be vigilant regarding their personal security by knowing the locations of police and fire stations, hospitals, and the U.S. Embassy.
Read in full here.

Not everyone, of course, is pleased with this security precaution. Michael Rubin, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute writing in Commentary magazine has this to say:
"While the State Department is right to worry about the security of its employees, removing diplomats at the first sign of trouble undercuts diplomats’ ability to gather information.[...] When the going gets tough, that is the time for American diplomats to be on the street, in local markets, and generally outside embassy walls or the confines of posh neighborhoods."
I don't know that you'd call this "the first sign of trouble." The demonstrations in Bahrain have been on and off since last year. And really, the mission is relocating staff housing in this arid archipelago, it's not like the embassy is shut down for business. 

Perhaps there is something to this that Mr. Rubin may not have considered. Our diplomats in Bahrain continue to meet with their local contacts; feeding the fish in Washington, D.C. three times a day, plus snacks becomes urgent and absolutely necessary. But how effective can our diplomats do their job if they are constantly worried about the safety of their family members who go about their lives in this chaotic and dangerous environment? They do not have security escorts and drivers, you know.  Diplomatic spouses and kids, at least, deserve to have snacks and dinners without a serving of tear gas. 



Thursday, January 19, 2012

2012 Consular Leadership Day Theme: Follow Courageously, Just Not Peter Van Buren

The Bureau of Consular Affairs (CA) recently announced its new leadership theme for 2012 which is "Follow Courageously." CA, of course, is the home bureau of some of our consular officers who offended the tigers with their blogs -- MLC, Peter Van Buren, to name a couple. Others will remain unnamed in this blog, no sense dragging the blog carcasses out in the open.  The consular officers are natural targets; they are some with the most interesting stories in the Foreign Service.  But it's a love/hate relationship, see? Anyway, one of our friends inside the Big House excitedly told us this year's theme of following courageously.
 
I said, hey, what does “Follow Courageously” mean?  Here is what I'm told:

The CA Leadership Tenets describe it as the ability to “take ownership of our work and hold ourselves accountable for improving performance and making our organization stronger,” and to “dissent respectfully and help the boss become more effective in the interest of the team and the mission.” 
So if you use bad, undiplomatic words in following your conscience, that's probably not following courageously? You should be able to swear without opening your mouth. You should also be able to rock the boat without getting anyone wet.  What else?
Following courageously does not mean following blindly.  In this day of limited resources, growing workload, and changing circumstances that drive our ability to respond to new challenges, we all need to follow courageously – and that can take many different approaches. 

Following courageously includes challenging the status quo in favor of exploring new, more efficient ways to work – whether enlisting new technologies, changing business processes, or even delegating certain tasks to others.
CA/P has led the way on social media, using tools such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube to engage stakeholders and customers in new and exciting ways.  Many have proposed, either in FSI classes, via cables, or in forums such as CA Leads, the Sounding Board, ACS  , and VOxPopuli, innovative solutions to improve processes.  For Consular Leadership Day 2012, employees are invited to think about the many ways the section, office, or agency has followed courageously and pushed the status quo envelope. 
Challenge the status quo, but not/not in your blog, silly.  No mention of Blogger, Wordpress -- either those are not exciting tools or they are dangerous engagement tools. So what do you do if you want to "follow courageously," and "dissent respectfully" and waaaahhhhhh, excuse me, but no one, NO ONE is listening?
"Following courageously often means speaking truth to power, especially when the message is unwelcome.  Many of us have faced instances when we had to deliver bad news to our bosses, or push back against a decision that was contrary to consular law or policy.  It isn’t easy, and some bosses simply don’t want to hear dissenting views, no matter how respectfully presented.  Failure to report problems, however, means they just get worse.  Offices that do not allow, and even encourage, respectful dissent only undermine their own effectiveness.  Successful offices create an environment where employees know they can raise issues safely and be taken seriously – and that management will work with them to remedy problems.  As an organization, do you encourage people to speak up about problems and explore solutions?  How do you follow courageously with those above your work unit?  How can you encourage them to create an environment where respectful dissent is given appropriate attention?"
Nice words but really, in which State Department sector is this real?  And when you are not working in a "successful office" what then?  What happens when you report certain problems and the tigers bite your head off?  Is there anyone in CA who would be willing to loan the courageous follower a Scottish targe or shield for protection from incoming projectiles? My CA friend, unfortunately does not have the answers.
"Following courageously can mean recognizing and nurturing someone who is a leader without rank - that person who is the “power of one” within your section, office, or agency.  You know the type – someone who is a ten-star leader, the “go to” person who gets things done, and is always thinking about what should happen, not just what does happen.  It is not always easy for more senior managers to acknowledge and promote the leadership role of these employees, but the best managers will follow courageously themselves, and put the good of the organization first."
"Following courageously can mean thinking holistically about how we work, creating a “one-team” approach, and achieving economies of scale that maximize the use of scarce resources.  Consular Team India’s example of assigning specific country-wide responsibilities to a consulate, or the functional cross-training that occurs in so many posts, are only a few ways that posts are making better use of their resources.  
I said, hey, where are these ten-star leaders? Are they in India; I mean, why the special mention? Either they are in India or the consular bureau favorites insiders are now in India.
 
Thus it was made clear to us that following courageously can take many forms. But I am certain that it does not include writing a book like you know who. 

I mean, did you know that they took away his desk, and his badge, and he's not even allowed to play with paper clips? If he ever gets back to Foggy Bottom, there is a bar of Lifeboy soap with his name on it.  Anyway, I heard that he got away with a Skillcraft pen, so he's still writing and doing things and giving folks migraine. But that's a blessing in disguise, the migraine, that is; there is something that beautifully treats migraine -- Botox! An Indian cosmetologist promised, "A few prick jabs are like god's gift for the chronic migraine patients."

Folks, the migraine line starts over there. Follow courageously and stay quiet.

Pardon me?  No, there is absolutely no truth to the rumor that Consular Leadership Day has been renamed Peter Van Buren Day. 









Saturday, January 14, 2012

US Mission Italy: #CostaConcordia Shipwreck (Contact Numbers)

Carnival Cruise's Costa Concordia struck rock off the coast of Isola del Giglio, Italy  at approximately 10:00pm CET.  It sustained significant damage causing the ship to list severely and the order was given to abandon ship and deploy the lifeboats. The cruise ship which had approximately 3,200 passengers and 1,000 crew members was on a seven-day voyage. News reports currently put the deaths at three with 40 passengers missing.

Some footage here:



The US Embassy in Rome via Twitter https://twitter.com/AmbasciataUSA reports that there were 126 Americans onboard and no crew members based on information from local authorities.

The U.S. Consulate Florence and Embassy Rome are reportedly assisting Americans from Costa Concordia with travel arrangements & documents. We note that the consular section in Florence has two officers and six LE staff. The consular section in Rome is not much bigger with two and a half ELOs, two mid-level supervisors, and the section chief.

Via US Embassy Rome

Rome, January 14, 2012
The United States Embassy in Rome sends its condolences to the families of those passengers of the Costa Concordia cruise ship who died in a shipwreck off the coast of Tuscany early this morning. 

The welfare of American citizens in Italy is the highest priority of the U.S. Embassy in Rome, and the U.S. Embassy in Rome and the U.S. Consulate in Florence are working with local officials and the families of the passengers to provide assistance to Americans affected by the accident.

The U.S. Embassy has established an emergency response team.  Concerned Americans may call +39 06 4674 1 for emergency information.

Based on information provided by local authorities, the US Embassy estimates 130 Americans may have been on board.

As of 5:00 pm local time, there are no reports of serious injuries to American citizens, though we cannot yet account for all Americans believed to have been present on the ship at the time of the accident.

Further information will be posted on Twitter @AmbasciataUSA and Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ambasciatausa
The American Citizens Services Units for Rome and Florence respectively also have email inquiry addresses but I don't know how well these accounts are monitored:

Rome: uscitizensrome@state.gov

Florence: uscitizensflorence@state.gov

The Carnival company has released the following country-specific contact numbers to reach Costa Cruises:
U.S.          800-462-6782
Italy          848505050
Austria     00438109006565
Germany     +4940570121314
France        +33155475554
Spain         +34934875685
Portugal      +34914185951
UK             08453510552
Update 1/16:
The US Embassy in Rome has revised the estimated number of Americans aboard the #Costa #Concordia down to 120, of which 118 have been accounted for. It is also using Twitter for help in locating retired Minnesota couple, Gerald and Barbara Heil believed to be passengers of Costa Concordia and are unaccounted for.   Email any info to ItalyConcordiaUSC@state.gov.




Tuesday, January 3, 2012

No mother-in-law evictions for consular officials

The Canadian Minister of State of Foreign Affairs recently issued a reminder to Canadians traveling overseas on the importance of careful planning for safe travel and what consular officials can and cannot do:

“During this holiday season, the many Canadians travelling abroad are reminded to be proactive in reducing the risks and increasing the chances of having a safe and enjoyable trip. Consular services are available in more than 150 countries around the world, it is important for Canadians to know which services we do and do not provide.

“Consular Officials CAN:

    Provide advice and information for medical services.
    Contact relatives or friends when you need serious help.
    Provide sources of information for local laws and customs.
    Replace lost or stolen passports.

“Consular Officials CANNOT:

    Ask your mother-in-law to leave your house.
    Purchase tickets for a musical or entertainment event.
    Settle disputes between you and your partner.
    Pick up your dog at the airport.

Tales from the consular front lines

A family called about their son, who had been arrested for trafficking drugs in Germany. They wanted to know if the Government of Canada was planning to send a helicopter into the prison yard to rescue him. They were very surprised to learn this wasn’t a service provided.

An U.S. citizen called wanting to know how she could get a Canadian passport. When told she could not get one, because she was not a Canadian citizen, she said that she thought an American going to Canada needed a Canadian passport.

A Canadian citizen visiting Chicago wanted to know if consular officers could get tickets for The Oprah Winfrey Show. Another Canadian, flying into London, wanted to see a play that was ending that night and asked consular officers to line up that morning for cheap, same-day tickets.

A Canadian asked the Embassy in Beijing if someone could come and pick up his dog at the Beijing airport after the dog was refused boarding due to lack of proper paperwork. He wanted consular officers to pick up the dog and take care of it until he could get things sorted out—and he did not want to miss his flight and lose the ticket.

A Canadian citizen living abroad had an argument with his girlfriend, after which she kicked him out. He wanted consular officials to talk to the girlfriend and negotiate his return home.

A Canadian living in Cairo asked consular officials to escort her mother-in-law out of the Canadian woman’s apartment.

An excellent reminder, not at all different from what American consular officials can and cannot do for Americans overseas. The helicopter rescue must be  a fairly common expectation. Below is the State Department's response on why it does not use the U.S. military, including helo rescues in every evacuation:

"We use the resources that are most expedient and appropriate to the situation. Expectations of rescue by helicopters, the U.S. military, and U.S. government-provided transportation with armed escorts reflect a Hollywood script more than reality. While some evacuations involve U.S. military or other U.S. government assets, most rely on commercial transportation and local infrastructure. Any level of departure assistance constitutes an enormous logistical effort."



Wednesday, October 26, 2011

OIG Review of Visa Lottery Snafu Details Failure of the Consular Bureau's CST Office

The State Department's OIG has released one of its shortest limited scope reports on the visa lottery failure this past summer.  Not only was the visa lottery a public relations debacle, there was also a case filed in federal court on it; later dismissed in mid-July. Excerpts from the report:

The OIG team found three problems that led to this failure, all of which stem from the lack of adherence to sound project management and systems development principles. First, CA's Office of Consular Systems and Technology (CST) implemented a system programming change without performing adequate testing. Second, CST changed contract task orders without notifying the Office of Acquisition Management (AQM). Third, CST management failed to adequately discuss the changes with all stakeholders and thus did not fully understand how overseas consular officers administer the DV program.
[...]
The primary reason for the DV 2012 program failure was that CST did not adequately test the new computer program for the random selection of potential DV program participants. Section 203(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), as amended, 3limits the number of DVs that may be available by both region and country. Therefore, 22 CFR § 42.33(c) requires that selection be based on random rank-ordering of participants by region through a computer program designed for this purpose. When participants submit their records, the computer program assigns a sequential number to each record based on the participant's region. Subsequently, the selection process uses the sequential numbers to randomly rank-order the participants' records. CST management decided in November 2010 not to use the commercial off-the-shelf statistics analysis program that it had used successfully for random rank-ordering in numerous previous years. Instead, CST management asked one of its contractors to develop a program. This new computer program had a coding error that produced a nonrandom rankordering and thus failed to meet INA requirements. The program not only selected 98 percent of the applicants from the first two dates of the allowed submission dates, it also selected multiple individuals from the same families.

According to CST management and the contractor staff who developed the new DV computer program, testing scenarios were limited to validating that all geographic regions were assigned the correct numerical limitation and that the total number of selectees to be drawn was accurate. In addition, the development, testing, and production implementation of the program were done exclusively by one contracting company that, due to poor planning and failure to consult with all DV stakeholders, did not have adequate information to create a complete test plan for the computer program. Key stakeholders such as CST's independent validation and verification team, the Visa Office, and the contractor that operated and managed the legacy computer program were not involved in planning and implementing the new computer program.

CST management acknowledged that it did not follow the standard systems development life cycle (SOLC) process, which establishes standards for planning, developing, testing, and deploying systems. Sound systems and computer program development calls for the use of the SOLC process, and in its absence, the project was implemented without the opportunity to identify and assign the appropriate resources to support and adequately test this critical computer program. As a result, while the new contractor was developing the new program, the incumbent contractor tasked with operating and maintaining the legacy selection program was unaware of the new development effort and was preparing to run the old program. CST did not notify the incumbent contractor until it was time to run the selection process. Thus there was no opportunity for the two contracting companies to share information and plan the implementation.

Furthermore, the decision to move to an internally developed DV randomization computer program changed the contractors' scopes of work, and the CST director did not notify AQM of these tasking changes. This lapse provides further support for the OIG May 2011 inspection report recommendation that CA and AQM conduct independent audits of CST contracts.

CST failed to follow the Department's 5 FAM 610 requirements for project development, integration, modification, and maintenance of information technology systems, products, and services. These requirements apply to all Department personnel and to contractors involved in Department systems and program planning. Additionally, the U.S. Government Accountability Office in its internal controls standards identifies Application Software Development and Change Control as one of the internal management controls to mitigate risk for fraud, waste, abuse, and mismanagement. One of the requirements is that all new or revised software be thoroughly tested and approved. By not adhering to the SDLC process and Department guidance, CST failed to meet established quality standards and business objectives and added unnecessary and costly steps to the program development and testing stages.
The report provides three brief recommendations but as if unable to help itself, the report points out to one final issue about CST management:
A final issue is that CST managers demonstrated a lack of understanding of visa issuance procedures and failed to consult appropriately with all stakeholders. For example, CST managers believed it was necessary to centralize all DV petition data because they erroneously thought the legacy stand-alone system allowed unqualified applicants to be issued visas without proper security checks. In actual practice, no visas are issued using the selection database. Consular officers adjudicate all DV applicants in the same system and with the same clearance processes as all other immigrant visas issued overseas.

Principals in the Visa Office were not aware that changes had been made to the computer program until after it failed and the results had to be voided. CST management further stated that it is not clear to them which office is responsible for administering the DV program.
[...]
The OIG review of the DV 2012 program emphasizes the need for CST to implement the recommendations made in the May 2011 report. At the time of the current review, CST management had neither provided OIG with an after-action report nor conducted a lessons learned analysis to share with CST staff or other stakeholders. CST was also unable to provide the OIG team with a plan for future implementation of the DV program. These documents are vital to the effective oversight and management of the DV program and will help avoid this and similar incidents, as well as their potentially costly consequences, in the future.
If CA's Office of Consular Systems and Technology (CST) seems familiar, that's because we have posted about it here, here and most recently, here.  Hard to imagine that there won't be any fall out on this over there in terms of top management shuffle. 

Here's the rather shocking part.  CST apparently is not sure who is responsible for administering the Diversity Visa program. Dammit, all my gray hairs jumped as if pulled by electric sheeps! All these years, CST wasn't sure and it never bothered to find out? Holy molly guacamole!

Which of the following belong together?  a) Diversity Visa, b) Visa Office, c) Overseas Citizens Services. 

Bingo! I can do this with my eyes close - see? 




Related item:
Review of the FY 2012 Diversity Visa Program Selection Process, ISP-I-12-01


Related posts:

Tuesday, June 14, 2011 | Inadequate Oversight of State Dept's Consolidated Consular Database-- Is This WikiLeaks Waiting to Happen, Again?

Monday, July 18, 2011 | US Court Dismisses Lawsuit Against State Dept for Voided Green Card Lottery

Wednesday, October 12, 2011 | State Dept CA CIO Kirit Amin Rants on FSOs, Cronyism, Nepotism, "Doormats"... Two Days Later, Apologizes






Friday, October 21, 2011

Senators Propose U.S. Visas for Alien Home Buyers with $500K in Cash Investment, Dictators and Drug Lords Lining Up Over There

WSJ reports that Charles Schumer (D., N.Y.) and Mike Lee (R., Utah) are preparing to introduce a bipartisan bill that would give residence visas to foreigners who spend at least $500,000 to buy houses in the U.S.

According to WSJ, the proposed measure would offer visas to any foreigner making a cash investment of at least $500,000 on residential real-estate—a single-family house, condo or townhouse. Applicants can spend the entire amount on one house or spend as little as $250,000 on a residence and invest the rest in other residential real estate, which can be rented out.

But applicants may want to read the small print if this bill actually pass in Congress. More from WSJ:

Foreigners immigrating to the U.S. with the new visa wouldn't be able to work here unless they obtained a regular work visa through the normal process. They'd be allowed to bring a spouse and any children under the age of 18 but they wouldn't be able to stay in the country legally on the new visa once they sold their properties.

The provision would create visas that are separate from current programs so as to not displace anyone waiting for other visas. There would be no cap on the home-buyer visa program.

So, basically, the deep pockets foreigners with $500K can buy houses in the United States, and will be granted resident visas, but they're not allowed to work. Of course, with 500K, it's not like they're the kind you see who shows up to pick apples in Washington State or oranges in Florida.

We are obviously looking for independently wealthy foreigners who do not need to work while they enjoy their new houses in a real American neighborhood. I just renovated my 1910 house, maybe it's time to put this in the market? Or, I could sell my house to a foreigner and propose to house-sit my house except for the 180 days when the owners are supposed to live in it for U.S. tax purposes. Sounds like a deal?


Folks, have you considered the unintended consequences of this bill? It used to be that people who want to come here and can't get visas pay smugglers to sneak them in. I hear that the price go from $2,000 to name that price.  Now, under this proposed bill, people with $500K can come here with a resident visa, and we'll even roll out the red carpet.

Wanna guess who has that much cash floating around? Well, for starters, dictators, drug lords, drug traffickers and their girlfriends/boyfriends always have that much cash around, in case.

But, but ... that's not going to happen because they will be screened scrupulously, and they won't be able to take American jobs because working here without a separate permit would be illegal under this bill. Besides DHS/ICE will go after them. You know, like they've gone after other illegal aliens and overstays in this country. The same agency who has no idea when foreign visitors exit the country. Or not.

Oh, and who else has that kind of cash? The banks. Of course, the banks. Imagine this in Fox News: "I meant no harm, I just want to have my kids live in our home in America." If there is a rush in bank robberies, you know who to blame.

Below is an excerpt from the press release of the Senator Mike Lee, the honorable representative from Utah. Senator Lee might consider getting a new PR writer, this one absolutely flunks on basic details and it reflects badly on the boss:
The Visa Improvements to Stimulate International Tourism to the United States of America Act (VISIT-USA Act) would remove bureaucratic red tape that stifles travel and investment in the U.S. For instance, the bill would reduce barriers for Canadian and Chinese visitors whose consumer spending provides a lift to the U.S. economy. The bill would also expedite priority visa applicants, introduce videoconferencing as a means to screening foreign nationals, and make major changes to visa procedures for U.S. allies in the fight against al Qaeda.

To confront the housing crisis, the legislation would provide, for the first time, a three-year residential visa for foreign nationals who invest at least $500,000 in residential real estate in the United States. At least $250,000 must be spent on a primary residence where the visa holder will reside for at least 180 days out of the year while paying taxes to the U.S.  Applicants would still be subject to standard criminal and national security background checks and, once approved, would not be able to receive government benefits such as Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security.  The program would not serve as a path to citizenship for foreign nationals. Real estate analysts have said this proposal could lift demand for U.S. homes and help ease the housing crisis. Famed investor Warren Buffett has also supported the concept of enticing foreign homebuyers previously.
[...]
The Schumer-Lee bill has been endorsed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the U.S. Travel Association, the American Hotel & Lodging Association and the U.S. Olympic Committee.

A breakdown of the main provisions in the VISIT-USA Act, beyond the homebuyer visa provision, appears below:
  • Encourage Chinese Nationals to Travel to the U.S:  Currently, Chinese nationals must apply for a new U.S. visa every year while travelers from other countries can receive up to 10-year multiple entry visas. The bill would allow Chinese tourists access to 5-year multiple-entry visitor visas,  in order to eliminate this significant disincentive to travel to the United States. To ensure maximum security, stop terrorism, and address fraud concerns, Chinese tourists with 5-year visas will also be required to use the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA). A recent report showed that the average Chinese visitor to the U.S. spends $6,000.
  • Expedite Priority Visitors: Currently, many people of means do not travel to the United States because of the waiting times for visas. The VISIT-USA Act will allow the State Department to charge an extra fee to expedite the processing of a U.S. passport just like the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service charges an extra fee to expedite the processing of a nonimmigrant visa. (HUH? *** see my note below)
  • Introduce Technology Into the U.S. Visa System: Applicants for a U.S. visa are often forced to make significant investments of time and money. The VISIT-USA Act authorizes the Secretary of State to conduct a videoconference pilot program as a method for conducting visa interviews of foreign national applicants. This would ensure that U.S. visitors spend their money inside the U.S. on our goods and not on going through red tape.
  • Encourage Canadian Tourism to the United States: Under current law, without a visa, Canadian citizens are not permitted to remain in the United States for longer than 180 days.  Many Canadians would remain in the United States for a longer period of time during periods where the weather is still cold if they had a legal ability to do so.  In addition, Canadians who currently return to Canada after 180 days are unable to take day-trips across the border to northern-border-states in America. The VISIT-USA Act creates a new “Canadian retiree visa” (non-immigrant visa) that allows Canadians who are: (1) over age 50 (with derivative benefits to a spouse and minor children); (2) who can show that they own a residence in the United States or have purchased rental or hotel accommodations in the United States for the duration of their stay; and (3) are not otherwise inadmissible – to have a visa that lasts 240 days, and is renewable every 3 years.
  • Encourage U.S. Travel During Low Peak Season: One of the greatest contributing factors to high visa demand is the summer travel season. Given that visa interview wait times typically lengthen during the summer months, this bill permits the State Department to lower visa application fees during off-peak seasons to give travelers the incentive to apply for visas when demand is lower.
  • Expedite Visa for Countries Aiding the U.S. in Fight Against Al Qaeda: The Visa Waiver program gives citizens of selected countries the ability to travel to the US under the ESTA program, rather than go through the more lengthy and complicated US Tourist Visa application process, but it’s not available to all U.S. allies.  The VISIT-USA Act amends the Immigration and Nationality Act regarding the visa waiver program to: (1) authorize the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS), in consultation with the Secretary of State, to designate program countries; (2) adjust the criteria for visa refusal rates to permit entry into the program if a country has a low visa overstay rate; (3) set a maximum 3% visa overstay rate for program countries; and (4) revise probationary status and program termination provisions
  • Expediting Entry for Priority Visitors:  The global entry program is a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) program that allows expedited clearance for pre-approved, low-risk travelers upon arrival in the United States. At the moment, U.S. Customs and Border Protection lacks the ability to add specific foreign nationals to the global-entry prescreening system if they are not nationals of one of the “participating countries” that the United States has a reciprocal agreement with.   This creates problems for certain high-priority visitors with decision-making capacity to bring important international events—such as the Olympics, the World Cup, conventions, etc.—to the United States.  This section would permit Customs and Border Protection to add important foreign dignitaries to the global entry program on a “case-by-case” basis if they are employed by an organization that maintains a strong working relationship with the United States and do not pose security risks.

The VISIT-USA Act represents the most significant reform of the U.S. immigration system in a generation, all the while adding a significant boost to our economy through increased foreign investment and tourism. Although a budget analysis of the proposal is not yet available, the senators said it was highly likely the package would significantly reduce the deficit through the increased tax revenues collected from new visa holders living in the U.S.

I have yet to read the text of the bill but I already feel for our consular officers working at over 250 consular posts.  Videoconferencing, also coming soon to the a virtual interview booth near you.

Might this be a good time to suggest that the State Department invite Senators Schumer and Lee to go through ConGen training and deploy both under temporary consular commissions for at least 180 days at a visa issuing post? Preferably to Guangzhou, Manila, Lagos and Mexico City conducting visa interviews?

It's a fun gig, you guys!  This would help you both understand the process, as well as teach you that the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service process nonimmigrant visa petitions; but nonimmigrant visas are issued by the Department of State.  I know it's confusing.  You will also learn that the State Department already charges $60 for expedited processing of U.S. passports (*** so no need to add that in the new bill unless you're upping the tab).  They'll teach you how to read faces and how to administer a smell test to determine who is telling a fib; a great trick by the way to bring back to Congress.  During training you'll pretend like you're in a different country, and then you will actually be shipped to a different country where all your new acquaintances become your best friends as you see them in front of your visa interview window. You won't regret it ever or forget the experience for that matter! And it will help make you become better legislators especially on this interesting and exciting field of immigration.

Try it, try it ... you will like it, you see.






Tuesday, October 18, 2011

U.S. Mission China Adjudicated More Than 1 Million Visas, Visitors Add More Than $5 Billion to US Economy

Official portrait of United States Secretary o...         Image via WikipediaNew U.S. Ambassador to China, Gary Locke recently announced a 34% increase on adjudicated visas for Chinese applicants among our consular posts in China. Chinese visitors also reportedly added more than $5 billion to the U.S. economy during the previous fiscal year:

Ambassador Gary Locke announced that the U.S. Mission to China adjudicated more than one million U.S. visas for Chinese applicants during fiscal year 2011.  The U.S. Embassy in Beijing and Consulates in Shanghai, Guangzhou, Shenyang and Chengdu all contributed to this accomplishment, which represents a 34 percent increase over last year.

Ambassador Locke stressed the significance of this achievement, “The U.S.-China relationship is profoundly important, and welcoming Chinese visitors to the United States strengthens our cultural and commercial ties.  I am very pleased at the success we have had in significantly reducing wait times for visa appointments this year.”

According to the Department of Commerce, more than 801,000 Chinese visited the United States in 2010.  These visitors added more than $5 billion to the U.S. economy.

The U.S. Mission to China will continue to invite Chinese tourists, students, and businesspeople to visit the United States, a premier destination for travelers from around the world.  The Mission will continue to reduce visa interview wait times to the greatest extent possible by adding staff and eliminating inefficiencies wherever possible.

I have a feeling that this is going to be the start of the "counting beans" era at our overseas posts.  Consular posts overseas already are under pressure to keep the visa interview wait time, not that it makes a difference to Havana which now has 999 days wait time for visa interviews.  Posts may now be asked to calculate (or obtain the numbers elsewhere) on how much their visa applicants contribute to the U.S. economy.

So far, no one has posted readily available information on how much the U.S. Treasury is earning from visas and consular services collected at our posts overseas. I was told once that State's Consular Bureau does not like advertising that.  Note that state.gov already post statistics of visa issuance but not visa applications.  In 2010, our consular posts worldwide issued 6,422,751 nonimmigrant visas. Even at a regular tourist visa fee of $140, that's $899.2 million in US dollars.  Some type of visas like the petition based categories and investors/intracompany transferee visas cost more. And since a lot more applicants are refused, that $899.2 million is probably only about a third of a whole bucket.

For some, even the money generated by the visa application fees would not be enough.  There have been calls on and off about reforming the visa system to make it more "traveler-friendly."  Expect to hear more about the visa system and how it could generate more American jobs. As two Seattle-based CEOs put it, "winning back our share of the global long-haul travel market to 2000-2001 levels would create 1.3 million new American jobs by 2020 and add $859 billion in economic output."

In the meantime, we'll be in the lookout for bean-counter pressers from our posts overseas. Too early to tell if this is a trend.









Wednesday, October 12, 2011

State Dept CA CIO Kirit Amin Rants on FSOs, Cronyism, Nepotism, "Doormats"... Two Days Later, Apologizes

In June, I wrote about the OIG review of the Consular Affairs Bureau's Consolidated Consular Database (CCD) ran under the umbrella of CA/CST.

To recap, the OIG arrived at the following conclusion:

The CCD is the backbone of all consular applications and services and supports domestic and overseas passport and visa activities. The CCD is the repository for data from all the individual consular sections and passport office databases. It uses state-of-the-art technology with agile and robust design for scalability and availability. The CCD is accessed by 11,000 Department users, as well as 19,000 users in other agencies (for example, DHS, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Social Security Administration.). The CCD is the personally identifiable data repository for American citizens services, passports, immigrant visas, and nonimmigrant visas. Because of the CCD’s importance to national security, ensuring its data integrity, availability, and confidentiality is vital

CST does not have adequate oversight of CCD operations. [REDACTED]

The report also reviewed leadership and management issues and its impact on CST, and points out that of the total 68 personnel working at CST only 6 are Foreign Service Officers.  Make a mental note of that. Read more here.

On October 5, 2011, Federal News Radio reports that "State's Amin leaving CIO role temporarily."  That's Kirit Amin who has been CIO at the Bureau of Consular Affairs for four years.  Excerpts below:
Kirit Amin, the chief information officer of the State Department's Bureau of Consular Affairs, said he will take a 120-day reassignment with the State Department CIO.

He cited frustration with senior management decisions and the refusal of employees to change the way they work as some of the reasons for the move.

"I think we've made a tremendous difference in spite of opposition from people entrenched in the government for years," Amin said in an exclusive interview with Federal News Radio. " ... I was saying State was doing some contracts which are bad contracts — that was costing us far more than it should. I said 'Wait a minute,' and they want to cover it up. There is a lot of cronyism and nepotism going on at State."
[...]
"The State Department is ruled by the foreign service. These guys go overseas and have a good time and come here and have no idea what they are doing," he said. "The agency is ruled by them, and even Secretary Hillary Clinton is starting to admit to that. I think the civil service employees are treated like doormats. You fight with them for what's right and they can't take it."

The American Foreign Service Association has objected to Amin's comments, calling them "outrageous."
Read in full here.

Federal News Radio then reports that Daniel Hirsch, state vice president of AFSA, took exception to those comments. Also dated October 5, AFSA objects to Amin's characterization of Foreign Service:
In an emailed statement to Federal News Radio, Hirsch wrote, "These outrageous comments raise serious questions about whether Mr. Amin even understands the basic mission of the agency he is working for, much as protesting that the Department of Defense is "ruled" by the military would raise questions about whether a person understood the purpose of that agency."

On October 6, by great coincidence, Bob Gourley of Sys-Con Media has a piece on the Department of State’s Consular Systems and Technology: A Track Record of Innovation, and Kirit Amin.   
This year, CST also won two awards from the Association For Federal Information Resources Management (AFFIRM), a Leadership Award in Service Excellence for the CEAC team and a Leadership Award in Service of the Country to Kirit Amin.

Leadership Award for Service to the Country: Kirit Amin, CIO, Bureau Consular Affairs, Office of Consular Systems & Tech, US Department of State Presented for excellence in government information services improvement or effectiveness on a national level by leveraging information for mission accomplishment.

On October 7, Mr. Amin released an open letter to AFSA, published by Federal News Radio.
On Wednesday, Federal News Radio reported that I was to be seconded to the Information Resources Management Office within the State Department. That was not incorrect. An article based on the phone conversation that I had with Jason Miller, Executive Editor of that outlet, contained elements of an interview that characterized my opinion on a number of concerns within the State Department, including my comments about professional, Foreign Service Officers who work here. It is worth mentioning, that those comments as stated in the article had nothing to do with, or any relationship to that new assignment.

To my colleagues and peers at AFSA, I offer my complete and sincere apology. The phone conversation with Miller, someone who I have worked with and known for some time, could not have come at a more inconvenient time. I had just learned of my new assignment and was working to put together a transition strategy to honor that obligation, when I took the call. It is never wrong to work with members of the media however in this age of instant communications I should have remembered that an instant answer is not always required.
[...]
During my four years of working at the Bureau of Consular Affairs, I have had the honor to work with talented, dedicated and brave FSOs as they were serving their country, often in very dangerous postings around the world. I have been privileged enough to become close friends with a number of them. Because of that special consideration, I sincerely regret and apologize if my words brought discredit to them or Foreign Service Officers in general.
[....]
I am confident that those of you that recognize the work represented by my team are also aware of my professional frustration of not being able to make the changes more quickly; especially, when I am so sure that they would enable us to serve the FSO community more expeditiously. That every manager, director and senior leader that I know, in government and the private sector, shares this frustration, is little solace.
Read in full here.

I don't know how this will end. But one of the possible scenarios would be Mr. Amin's resignation to spend more time with his family.







Thursday, October 6, 2011

Asst Sec'y for Something Affairs Formally Announced Forensic Document Design and Integrity Coordination Unit Created in 2009?


This came out recently as a notice from the Something Affairs Bureau (SAB):

"Assistant Secretary [REDACTED] formally established a Forensic Document Design and Integrity Coordination Unit (FDDI/C) within the Something Affairs Front Office in 2009.  FDDI/C advises on and coordinates all issues involving the development, evaluation, and selection of document security features, as well as quality assurance processes of new improvements to all of Something Affair's secure documents to include the U.S. Passport, U.S. Passport Card, U.S. visa foils, Consular Report of Birth Abroad, Consular Report of Death Abroad and the Border Crossing Card.
yadda yadda yadda  is developing material testing procedures to provide quality assurance evaluation for all of Something Affairs' secure documents."

Wait ...wait a minute ....

This doesn't have anything to do with our post on September 8, 2011 on Spouse of Former Asst Sec'y for Something Affairs Lands Senior Job at Something Affairs?  It doesn't. Right-o. It doesn't have anything to do with it. The two are absolutely not connected whatsoever.

Thank you, that's good to know; did not want to upset our friends at the Something Affairs Bureau.

That is a strange notice though, don't you think? If the Unit was created in 2009, why would the A/S announced it like now? Perhaps the domestic staffers of Something Affairs did not know that they have a Forensic Document Design and Integrity Coordination Unit?  Perhaps the overseas staffers of Something Affairs did not know that they have a Forensic Document Design and Integrity Coordination Unit since 2009 - they are abroad, after all?  Perhaps the Unit has a new person in charge? Perhaps the Unit has a new fax machine?  Perhaps ... perhaps .... otherwise, it's kinda hard to imagine somebody writing a late announcement like this. And not just late, late but like two years late. If I were A/S, I would fire that announcement drafter already because really -- how long does it take to write a 500-word announcement?

And not to pick on our friends over at SAB or anything but since when has the Consular Report of Death Abroad been considered a "secure document?"  This document is not controlled or numbered in anyway. It's not hidden in the vault under lock and hard to remember combination. If you look in the ACS shelves, you'll probably find these forms hanging out over there without a care in the world.

Pardon me? What, not anymore?  Oh, sorry, you don't actually type on it anymore.

The Consular Report of Death Abroad is now automated, so those forms are not palling around under the shelves anymore.  Although now online, apparently this document still has no control number of any sort.  My beer-buddy complains that it is the most non-user friendly computer thingee to fill out online.  So, this might just be a project that the Forensic Document Design and Integrity Coordination Unit (FDDI/C) can really sink its baby teeth in. The document provides essential facts about the death, disposition of remains, and custody of the estate of the deceased American and generally used in legal proceedings in U.S. as proof of death.  So, of course, it must be made secure, that is, if it's not secure yet.

Why didn't you just say so?
 



Thursday, September 8, 2011

Spouse of Former Asst Sec'y for Something Affairs Lands Senior Job at Something Affairs?

A note from a long time employee landed in our mailbox recently, tweaked to protect identifying punctuation marks -:) Below is a quick summary: 

  • The State Department's Something Affairs Bureau (SAB) is serious about that leadership precept of hiring the best team possible. 
  • Need proof? SAB hired XXXX about a year ago as a ZZZZ, a position that "never existed before" in the Something Affairs Bureau.
  • The writer notes that I may not recognize the new hire's name but that I might recognize the person's other name, which is Spouse of Former Assistant Secretary for Something Affairs.
  • The note ends with something like "SAB is serious about hiring the best!"

Yeah, you go, dear! I don't know all the details but sounds impressive... sign me up!

Now -- if I marry that good looking Consul General over there, may I get a job that never existed before, too?

No? You mean a spouse of the Consul General is not high enough for a personalized job creation? Dammit! Now I have to find an Assistant Secretary to snag. Life just isn't fair and shhh! I'm not/not getting any younger!  

Wait -- if I cannot find a willing or available Assistant Secretary, would a Deputy Assistant Secretary do? Please, pretty, please? The DASes are almost as good as the AS.  I promise I'll be very good. And I will come up with my very own job title (never before seen anywhere), so you won't even have to worry about that. Deal?

Oh, the things you do for a job these days! But if I get a personalized job creation at the Something Affairs Bureau, that will give me health insurance, TSP, social security retirement, sick leave, etc. etc.!

Now, I gotta chore to run ...

BTW -- names and suggestions for blind dates with a dashing someone preferably ranked Assistant Secretary but no lower than a DAS accepted via email until further notice.  










Friday, August 26, 2011

America's Gatekeeper in El Salvador Talks to 400 Applicants a Day?

The August 22 issue of WaPo has a piece from the Partnership for Public Service on the Federal Player of the Week - this one, about America's gatekeeper in El Salvador, a first tour foreign service officer.  The profile makes it sound as if the FSO, as "America's gatekeeper in El Salvador" is the only one guarding the gate over there.

To borrow Ambassador Crocker's phrase, "he is by no means alone."

As far as I'm told, there are about a dozen or so first tour officers working at our embassy in San Salvador, all performing visa and citizen services work at the consular section.  The other thing that seems striking about this profile is that the profilee is the embassy's Fraud Officer/Manager, a full time job in itself. That alone is not striking but speaking with "as many as 300 to 400 Salvadorans a day" is.  How many minutes can you really spend investigating each of the 400 applicants in an 8-hour workday?  Even if you spend 1.8 minute speaking with each one, you'll be at work until 9 o'clock at night with an hour of lunch to spare.  And anyway, I have never heard of officers doing 300-400 interviews a day even in the top visa mill posts (and El Salvador is not even a visa mill).

Well, have you?

He also appears to be the Ambassador's staff aide, which makes me wonder how he gets any sleep. Because as we all know, fraud and the front office are two of the more demanding assignment for newbies at any embassy.  And if he is serving concurrently in both positions in a section with a dozen other newbies, one has to wonder what's going on with the embassy's Junior Officer Rotation Program (JORP).


Excerpt below:

At just 26 years old, Vice Consul Navarro R. Moore is America’s gatekeeper in El Salvador, putting out the U.S. embassy’s welcome mat for Salvadorans seeking visas for legitimate entry to the United States, while maintaining a watchful eye for gang members, fraudulent documents and people who enter sham marriages for immigration purposes.

Moore is gratified when he can approve visas for people who want to visit family members living in the U.S. or who need life-saving medical treatment at an American hospital, but also when he can prevent people from illegally smuggling a child to the U.S. or passing off a fake birth certificate.

“We want people to come and see Disney World and enjoy the United States, but at the same time we have to follow the law and protect America and our borders,” Moore said.

Moore oversees three locally employed staff members who assist him as he searches for information and documents that detect and prevent passport and visa fraud. He speaks with as many as 300 to 400 Salvadorans a day, many of whom are intimidated about going to the embassy, and in his short time with them, he tries to put them at ease.

“He is the face of America, the first person, maybe the only person they’ll see,” said Ronald Robinson, a former State Department consul general and a mentor to Moore. “He must do his best to issue visas to those who deserve them and refuse those who can’t get them, in the most diplomatic
way.”

In this first tour of duty, Moore also handles requests for the ambassador, Mari Carmen Aponte, to participate in meetings and events, and prepares her by supplying her with pertinent information and helping with speeches.

While he may have just one foot on the diplomatic ladder’s first rung, Moore already is meeting people in high places. In his first year, Moore helped the ambassador host President Obama and the first lady, as well as Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

Read the whole thing here.

The article was reportedly prepared by the Partnership for Public Service and washington.com. Nothing against profiles but write ups like these reminds me of the "s/he walks on water" performance evaluation variety ... makes me fall off my chair and hurts my brain.





Tuesday, August 9, 2011

State Dept Issues New Travel Warning for Pakistan, the Wild, Wild West of South Central Asia -- But Where's The Sheriff?

On August 8, the State Department issued a new travel warning for Pakistan not only pointing to the potential danger to U.S. citizens throughout the country due to armed attacks including suicide bombings, but the widespread danger which includes false identification of individuals as intel operatives or private security contractors, spike in the prosecution for visa overstays,  severe restrictions in the travel of U.S. personnel, targeted killings and religious intolerance.  The kidnapping for ransom not just of foreign nationals but also of Pakistani nationals apparently has also increased dramatically nationwide.

Given the unpopularity of the United States in that country, I would not be surprise if consular access to incarcerated American citizens is also a very "challenging" endeavor for our consular officers in Pakistan.  Pakistan in my opinion offers the most dangerous assignments for our diplomats.  All posts in Pakistan except Quetta (25%) and Lahore (30%) get the same danger pay as the war zones of Iraq and Afghanistan at 35%.  But if you look at the attacks on diplomats and USG facilities, Pakistan is way ahead than either Baghdad or Kabul.

Excerpt from the new travel warning:

The presence of al-Qaida, Taliban elements, and indigenous militant sectarian groups poses a potential danger to U.S. citizens throughout Pakistan. Terrorists and their sympathizers regularly attack civilian, government, and foreign targets, particularly in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) province. The Government of Pakistan has heightened security measures, particularly in the major cities. Threat reporting indicates terrorist groups continue to seek opportunities to attack locations where U.S. citizens and Westerners are known to congregate or visit, such as shopping areas, hotels, clubs and restaurants, places of worship, schools, or outdoor recreation events. Terrorists have disguised themselves as Pakistani security personnel to gain access to targeted areas. Some media reports have recently falsely identified U.S. diplomats – and to a lesser extent U.S. and other Western journalists and workers for non-governmental organizations (NGOs)– as being intelligence operatives or private security personnel.

Since January 2010, terrorists have executed coordinated attacks with multiple operatives using portable weaponry such as guns, grenades, rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs), and suicide vests or car bombs in Peshawar, Lahore, Karachi, and Rawalpindi. Recent attacks included armed assaults on heavily guarded sites such as the naval air base in Karachi, the U.S. Consulate in Peshawar, police offices in Lahore and Karachi, military installations in Lahore, religious shrines including the Data Darbar shrine in Lahore and the Baba Farid Ganj Shakar shrine in southern Punjab, religious processions in Lahore, a hospital in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, and a food distribution center in Bajaur Agency.

U.S. citizens have been victims of attacks in the last few years.

On May 20, 2011, a U.S. consulate general vehicle in Peshawar was attacked, killing one person and injuring a dozen, including two U.S. employees of the mission.

On April 5, 2010, terrorists carried out a complex attack on the U.S. Consulate General in Peshawar, with several Pakistani security and military personnel killed or wounded.

On February 3, 2010, ten persons, including three U.S. military personnel, were killed and 70 injured in a suicide bombing at a new girls’ school in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province.

The October 2009 attack on the World Food Program headquarters resulted in serious injury of a U.S. citizen.

On November 12, 2008, a U.S. citizen contractor and his driver in Peshawar were shot and killed in their car.

In September 2008, over 50 people, including three U.S. citizens, were killed and hundreds injured when a suicide bomber set off a truck filled with explosives outside a major international hotel in Islamabad.

In August 2008, gunmen stopped and shot at the vehicle of a U.S. diplomat in Peshawar.

In March 2008, a restaurant frequented by Westerners in Islamabad was bombed, killing a patron and seriously injuring several others, including four U.S. diplomats.

On March 2, 2006, a U.S. diplomat, a Consulate General employee, and three others were killed and 52 people wounded when a suicide bomber detonated a car packed with explosives alongside the U.S. Consulate General in Karachi.

Visits by U.S. government personnel to Peshawar, Karachi and Lahore are limited, and movements by U.S. government personnel assigned to the Consulates General in those cities are severely restricted. U.S. officials in Islamabad are instructed to restrict the frequency and to minimize the duration of trips to public markets, restaurants, and other locations. Only a limited number of official visitors are placed in hotels, and for limited stays.

Depending on ongoing security assessments, the U.S. Embassy places areas such as hotels, markets, and/or restaurants off limits to official personnel. U.S. citizens in Pakistan are strongly urged to avoid hotels that do not apply stringent security measures and to maintain good situational awareness, particularly when visiting locations frequented by Westerners.

Access to many areas of Pakistan, including the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) along the Afghan border and the area adjacent to the Line of Control (LOC) in the disputed territory of Kashmir, is restricted by local government authorities for non-Pakistanis. Travel to any restricted region requires official permission from the Government of Pakistan. Failure to obtain such permission in advance can result in arrest and detention by Pakistani authorities. Due to security concerns the U.S. government currently allows only essential travel within the FATA by U.S. officials. Travel to much of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province and Balochistan is also restricted.

The Governor of the Punjab province and the federal Minister for Minority Affairs were assassinated in Islamabad in January and March 2011, respectively. There have been targeted attacks on a provincial minister in Balochistan, university faculty in Swat, and an Iranian diplomat in Peshawar. Suicide bomb attacks have occurred at Islamabad University, schools, rallies, places of worship, and major marketplaces in Lahore and Peshawar.

Reports of religious intolerance rose in 2010-2011. Members of minority communities, including a U.S. citizen, were victims of targeted killings. Accusations of blasphemy—a crime that carries the death penalty in Pakistan—against Muslims as well as non-Muslims also increased. Foreign nationals including U.S. citizens on valid missionary visas have encountered increased scrutiny from local authorities since early 2011. Local authorities are generally less responsive and do not operate with the level of professionalism that U.S. citizens may be accustomed to in the United States.

U.S. citizens throughout Pakistan have been arrested, deported, harassed, and detained for overstaying their Pakistani visas or for traveling to Pakistan with the inappropriate visa classification. U.S. citizens who attempt to renew or extend their visas while in Pakistan have been left without legal status for an extended period of time and subjected to harassment or interrogation by local authorities. In 2011, the number of U.S. citizens arrested, detained, and prosecuted for visa overstay increased markedly across the country.

U.S. citizens throughout Pakistan have also been kidnapped for ransom or for personal reasons. Reported kidnappings include the June 2011 kidnapping of a U.S. citizen in Lahore; the 2010 kidnapping of a U.S. citizen child in Karachi, and the 2009 kidnapping of a U.S. citizen official of the United Nations High Commission for Refugees in Balochistan. The kidnapping of Pakistani citizens and other foreign nationals, usually for ransom, continues to increase dramatically nationwide.

Read the whole thing here.






Friday, August 5, 2011

Whoops! No Double Standard Policy and US Embassy Bogota's Threat Info Dissemination

The State Department has what is called the "no double standard" policy  in its travel information program. 7 FAM dictates that if State shares important security threat information including criminal information with the official U.S. community, such information should also be made available to the non-official U.S. community.  Selective notification is against the law.  The regs also says that "If a post issues information to its employees about potentially dangerous situations, it should evaluate whether the potential danger could also affect private U.S. citizens/U.S. non-citizen nationals living in or traveling through the affected area."

The origin of the no double standard policy came from the Lockerbie bombing of 1988. Below is an excerpt from Jim Arkedis of ppi:

In the days before the holiday, the U.S. consulate in Frankfurt received vague threat information about a potential terrorist attack targeting American citizens.  The information didn’t state much, other than that the strike would emanate from Germany or possibly London.  The Regional Security Officer posted the threat information on a public bulletin board in the consulate, and many American government workers changed their Christmas travel plans.

As you’ve probably figured out by now, the travel warning turned out to be credible – the Lockerbie bombing of December 21, 1988 killed 190 American citizens, 270 total, traveling from London to JFK airport.  The flight had originated in Frankfurt, where the bomb was originally smuggled aboard.

While it was of course good that certain American government employees had avoided the catastrophe, a policy problem arose.  In short, there was a double standard in place:  Americans (and their families) who happened to work for the government in Frankfurt as everything from intelligence officers to economic advisors to custodians avoided the tragedy due only to their preferential position.  Americans elsewhere in Europe, whether in government or not, weren’t warned.
The Foreign Affairs Manual avoided mention of Lockerbie in its explanation of this policy:

In 1990, Congress passed the Aviation Security Improvement Act, which, in Section 109, added to the Federal Aviation Act a requirement that the President "develop guidelines for ensuring notification to the public of threats to civil aviation in appropriate cases”. The Act requires that the guidelines identify the officials responsible for deciding whether public notification of a threat is in the best interests of the United States and the traveling public, based on a consideration of among things, the specificity of the threat, the credibility of the information, and the ability to counter the threat. The guidelines were to be distributed to appropriate officials in the Departments of Transportation, State, and Justice, as well as to air carriers. The law prohibits selective notification of a threat to civil aviation to only selective potential travelers unless the threat applies only to them. These and other related provisions are now codified in 49 U.S.C. 44905. After enactment of these provisions, the Department decided to follow similar policies in non-civil aviation contexts.

The Office of the Inspector General questions the embassy's threat information dissemination in light of the no double standard policy.  Here is the US Embassy in Bogota, a 15% danger post: 
No Double Standard

The dissemination of threat information at this danger pay post may violate the Department’s “no double standard” policy. Some areas of Bogotá are off limits to U.S. Government employees because they are considered too dangerous. However, these areas are not identified as such in either the Colombia country-specific information sheet or the travel warning.

In addition, the embassy controls travel of its own employees throughout most of the country by delineating two safe areas (the north coast between Cartagena and Santa Marta) and the area around Bogotá (corresponding roughly to the Sabana de Bogotá plateau). The RSO approves visits to the rest of the country on a case-by-case basis after reviewing the security situation. Neither the Colombia country-specific information nor the travel warning mentions these two safe areas.

A third, lesser concern is the embassy’s use of hotels that are approved in advance by the RSO. Although vetting hotels is commonplace for official travel, requiring embassy employees to use the hotels while on personal travel again raises questions about possible double standard issues.

Fourth, the RSO issues email alerts to embassy staff about demonstrations or other disruptions in traffic that might impede embassy employees and make them vulnerable to criminal acts. The RSO does not send these alerts to a public Web site for the American traveling public.

The Department’s guidance on no double standard in Foreign Affairs Manual guideline 7 FAM 052.1 a. (1) applies to important security threat information, including criminal information. It states that “[s]uch information, if shared by the Department with the official U.S. community, generally should be made available to the non-official U.S. community if the underlying threat applies to both official and non-official Americans.”

There is no evidence that the travel restrictions for embassy employees for personal travel are based on threats that would not also apply to private U.S. citizens in Colombia. Therefore, the OIG team believes that the present system may violate the Department’s “no double standard” policy.

Recommendation 12: Embassy Bogotá should request from the Department of State by record communication a clarification of whether its dissemination of threat-related information is consistent with the Department of State’s “no double standard” policy and alter any procedures that do not comply with this policy. (Action: Embassy Bogotá)

Let's add 7 FAM 053.2-2 (e) below which has very clear reminders:

Remember that if you conclude you should warn your personnel or any U.S. Government employees, whether permanently stationed or on temporary duty abroad, about a security threat, your request for Department approval to warn post personnel should also include a request to share that same information with the non-official U.S. community under the "no double standard" policy (see 7 FAM 052). The policy applies whether the information is shared with U.S. Government employees in town meetings, in post newsletters, by e-mail, or on the telephone. The threat or warning information might include information about locations within the host country including hotels, restaurants, entertainment spots, places of worship, tourist sites, etc. Unless the threat is specific to a particular institution for reasons peculiar to that institution, you should not list names of specific locations, including names of hotels or restaurants, for which threat or warning information is available. You should also refrain from developing lists of "approved" hotels. In providing such lists to the community, you may actually increase the risk that perpetrators could change the target, thus increasing the risk to U.S. citizens/nationals who may be relying on such lists. (underlined for emphasis).