I haven't read the GAO report, but I can't wait to see it.

So what exactly might the report mean? And how might it be fixed? Should every FSO be required to be a language sponge? There are many of them out there in the State Dept and in the military. In my last assignment, I was clearly the best linguist on the country team. Second best was the political officer, who had previous assignments in China, Saudi Arabia, and South Africa. So he spoke Chinese, Arabic and Afrikaans in addition to German. How cool is that? Most of the other officers had similar shotgun careers, with varying degrees of proficiency in a host of strange languages.

The Army takes a totally different approach to developing soldier-statesmen. Army FAOs are developed as regional experts, focusing on the political, economic, cultural, language strauctures of a particular region. Once language proficiency is achieved, the first language is often used as a "springboard" to related languages -- romance, Slavic, Germanic, etc. The potential downside of that system is that steady-state proficiency requirements may not suffice in the next crisis de jour. The other downside of the Army system is that when I was up to my elbows in Southeast Europe, the Army passed over 3 premier Yugo specialist O-4s, and the best O-5 available. Guess we showed them. Although I am a firm believer in the Army system, maybe somebody at State has a better idea.

Now, if the GAO shoe fits, ya gotta ask how many military officers and NCOs are serving in jobs where they lack the requisite language skills. Damn! That shoe hurts when it's on the other foot.