Ambassadors: Rich People in Useless Jobs

If posts are just plums for political donors, why have them?
By Kevin Spak,  Newser Staff
Posted May 29, 2009 2:11 PM CDT
Ambassadors: Rich People in Useless Jobs
Then-Utah Governor Jon Huntsman gives his acceptance remarks after his nomination by President Barack Obama as ambassador to China, May 16, 2009.   (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta, FILE)

Barack Obama opted for politics as usual in his ambassador appointments yesterday, writes David Rothkopf for ForeignPolicy. Like recent predecessors, Obama turned to deep-pocketed campaign donors; hence Japan, the world’s second-largest economy, will deal with a tech lawyer whose sole qualification seems to have been his ability to raise $500,000, while France gets a guy who used to run the Muppets. Which raises the question: Do we even need ambassadors?

“If a job is meaningless enough to be entrusted to someone who is unqualified to do it, do we really need to fill that post?” asks Rothkopf. Once upon a time, we needed ambassadors to carry vital messages, but technology’s progressed a wee bit. Other countries hate dealing with ambassadors—they’d rather call someone consequential at the State Department. Let's put highly skilled professionals in the important posts, and forget the rest. (More Barack Obama stories.)

Get the news faster.
Tap to install our app.
X
Install the Newser News app
in two easy steps:
1. Tap in your navigation bar.
2. Tap to Add to Home Screen.

X