By Brian Bohl

If the White House could write an open letter to the public about the War on Terror’s progress, it might look something like this: “Incremental progress can be seen in Iraq. In fact, President George W. Bush promised that conditions are improving, justifying the troop surge that couldn’t prevent 2007 from being the deadliest year in the ongoing five-year war.

“Our government is fully committed to seeing Iraq become a haven for democracy in a hostile region of the world. The negativity from the Democrats and the press only undermines our troops and emboldens our enemies.”

The rhetoric always sounds good as a theoretical exercise. Of course, making sacrifices and fighting dangerous enemies are always easier when others are required to pick up the weapons and do the fighting. But with the American military death toll nearing 4,000 people, members of the State Department are backing away from serving in the area at an alarming clip.

That’s right: The same government that professes Iraq is becoming safer and will lambast anyone who questions the future of the region has employees whose actions suggest otherwise. Iraq is full of promise; just don’t ask those same government officials to actually serve in the area, because many are refusing to go out of-gasp-security concerns. In other words, Iraq isn’t dangerous enough to prevent young men and women in the armed services from serving extremely long deployments, but it’s not safe enough for bureaucrats who wouldn’t even be facing combat conditions outside the fortified Green Zone.

Due to lack of willing participants, Foreign Service officers had to be asked again to volunteer to serve in Iraq, or else the State Department would start ordering people there. As of Nov. 11, 26 positions were still open, facilitating the possibility of mandatory staffing.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice suggested the shortage is being overblown, telling the Dallas Morning News that she didn’t like “the idea that they don’t want to serve in the highest priority security and national security issue for the United States.”

If the idea of Foreign Service officers needing to be coaxed into serving wasn’t ironic enough, consider the words from Jack Broddy, who served 36 years for the organization. In a town hall-style meeting in late October, Broddy asked how the State Department could protect officers in Baghdad when bombs are “coming in every day. Rockets are hitting the Green Zone.”

“It is one thing if someone believes in what is going on over there and volunteers,” he added, “but it is another thing to send someone over there on a forced assignment. And I’m sorry, but basically that is a potential death sentence, and you know it. Who will raise our children if we are dead or wounded?”

Another Foreign Service officer asked about the lack of medical treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder. Keep in mind that these are concerns coming from administrators, not combat personnel. What’s appalling is these are the same concerns actual Iraqi war veterans have expressed throughout the years. Instead of answers or shortened assignments, deployments continue to be extended, and medical coverage continues to be far below what should be mandated for our fighting men and women.

State Department officials who work with laptops and files instead of guns and munitions shouldn’t dare demand security assurances or benefits the government won’t extend to our fighting men and women. When it comes to press conferences and public statements, the executive branch continually stresses that the situation on the ground isn’t as dire as it is portrayed in the media.

The protests from Foreign Service officials expose the White House’s claims about Iraq’s stability as a gross exaggeration of the truth. Either the war is going well and a sovereign state can be created, or the country’s security situation is regressing. The White House suggests the country can be salvaged, while the State Department’s recent actions represent a different reality. It’s time for actions and words to cease being two separate entities for our government.

Brian Bohl is a senior print journalism student. You may e-mail him at [email protected].