How come U.S. diplomats are refusing to go to Iraq?

Question

Uneasy U.S. diplomats yesterday challenged senior State Department officials in unusually blunt terms over a decision to order some of them to serve at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad or risk losing their jobs.

Answer 1

They don't want their butts blown off

Answer 2

Because they know how dangerous it is over there.

Answer 3

r u kidding me??

Answer 4

When you're talking about a large group of people, you get a lot of different opinions.  At the moment, very few, if any diplomats are actually refusing to go, and since the beginning of the war, several thousand have gone or are currently there. But there are more slots for diplomats in Iraq these days than anywhere else in the world. Plus the number of diplomats being sent to Iraq this year grew by 80. If the numbers were the same as last year, there would be no shortage at all. As it stands, the State Department was 40 or so people short and that has dropped by 15 or so since Monday.  

Some diplomats may well be afraid to go. Not exactly an irrational fear in a war zone, now is it? Some feel that the Department of State isn't doing enough to prepare them to work in a war zone, and some feel the Department of State isn't doing enough to protect them. These folks are civilians. They aren't trained for combat, and they weren't recruited because of their fighting skills.

And don't forget Iraq is hardly the only dangerous place these days.  I haven't seen anything to suggest that diplomats are refusing to volunteer for Afghanistan for example. Or elsewhere in the Middle East. Lebanon had a serious war a year ago last summer. When's the last time you heard that diplomats were refusing to serve there?  Several years ago, the consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia was overrun by terrorists, and eight people who worked there died. When's the last time you heard that diplomats were refusing to work in Saudi Arabia? These are intelligent, educated, highly experienced people. Maybe they have good reasons for their concerns.

Answer 5

These are not Diplomats as much as Bureaucrats.A true Diplomat wants to be where the action is.Where diplomacy is most needed.A Bureaucrat wants to shuffle papers and perpetuate their job.

Answer 6

I read an in-depth article on that today. The main concern is personal safety. Secondary concerns are training for such a tour, whether mandatory tours are the way to go (contractually OK but traditionally not used) and post-tour support i.e., mental health concerns (post traumatic stress disorder was the one case cited in this area).

Answer 7

1. Usually the State Department closes embassies in war zones. So they are questioning why the embassy in Iraq is even open. The first objective of an embassy is to take care of American citizens--the only American citizens over there are military people, and the military has their own "in-house" program to take care of the needs of the soldiers. Why do they want the embassy open anyway?

2. They are civilians, not trained military men and women. They have no experience in dangerous regions like that and probably won't be getting any. If the US can't provide armor for the troops, they are thinking that they won't get any training or protection either.