Public Diplomacy and POTUS Visits

Wednesday, April 18th 2012

Except for a few agents near the President, support staff stay out of photos

The current flap over misbehaving Secret Service agents in Cartagena is worth not much more than an amused “tsk-tsk” to most Americans.

But, in fact, this incident underlines a problem faced by public diplomacy officers every time and every place the President travels.  There are simply too many people involved in Presidential travel.  And many of them have not much real work to do, which leaves them lots of time to get into mischief.

When the White House begins to plan a Presidential foray into a foreign land, every agency in Washington, not to mention many USG regional offices and military geographic commands, all begin to plan their share of the visit.  And the rule is, if it is worth doing, it is worth overdoing!

The White House sends out experienced advance staff to plan the actual visit, arrange the press coverage, map out vehicle and aircraft movements, and manage protocol aspects. The Secret Service sends a small army of agents to think through the President’s every possible physical move.  White House Communication Agency technicians ensure that phones and radios, as well as microphones, will work.  Military advance teams arrange for Air Force One and other planes and helicopters that may be needed.  (They love London because the Ambassador’s residence, Winfield House, is one of the few government-owned properties in the middle of a major city capable of landing and parking Marine One and eight other helicopters in the garden—simultaneously!) 

Many of these tasks and people are actually necessary to a successful visit.  But, no one in Washington limits the numbers.  So a kind of “staff inflation” takes place.  Agency after agency adds extra people “to be safe,” or “just in case,” or “to provide backup,” or to observe or learn the ropes.  Some are there, like moths around a flame, just to be close to the President.

Any attempt to limit staff numbers is met with an offended, “What? Is anything more important than the President’s visit?”  It is as if to question your patriotism, if not your sanity?  Wouldn’t you expend every dollar and make every effort to ensure the visit’s success?

And so the numbers keep growing. And growing.

The major task that falls on the embassy is visitor management, that is, reserving hotel rooms and transportation needs, as well as paying the bills, on behalf of all these staff from different agencies and departments.  The second task, no less difficult, is to explain this tremendous influx of official Americans  to the host government and people.

Three weeks before the President’s arrival the embassy will book some thirty to fifty rooms for advance staff. This number will grow and grow into the hundreds as the days count down.  By the time the President arrives, the embassy will have booked almost a thousand hotel rooms in a city where the President will overnight.  Even a Presidential stopover of a few hours, with no overnight, will require several hundred hotel rooms. 

Neither this nor any previous White House will release firm figures for the cost or numbers of people involved in Presidential visits.  But, according to Politico, about a decade ago, the General Accounting Office released “two fairly detailed reports on President Bill Clinton's foreign travels (view them here and here). Secret Service costs were omitted as classified, but other government expenses were tallied up. Government agencies paid for about 1300 people on the Clinton Africa trip, excluding Secret Service personnel. When Clinton went to Chile, the government picked up the tab for 600 people. And there were 500 paid travelers in connection with the Clinton China trip.” 

These numbers do not count the traveling press corps, or corporate and NGO representatives who are often invited “to accompany the President.” But, the embassy will be responsible for finding lodging, transport and security for them too.

If the President’s travel is part of an international meeting, the U.S. contingent will outnumber all the other national delegations combined.  If it is a simple bilateral visit, the size and intrusiveness of the American preparations will astound local citizens.  (I remember standing on a hillside in Kampala watching President Clinton’sl motorcade, all 48 vehicles, as they wound their way out of the city to an event in a nearby town.)

Not only does the public diplomacy officer have to explain why the White House can’t depend on local services and supplies (as other nations do when their valuable national leaders visit), but they often have to apologize for major inconveniences caused by U.S.-demanded security measures and traffic-snarling motorcades.  (Most of our European allies have learned from hard experience to insist—firmly—that the U.S. President’s motorcade consist of no more than a dozen vehicles.)   Some cities have found it easier to give the entire population a day off from work and school in order to accommodate a U.S. Presidential visit.

Don’t get me wrong. Every Foreign Service officer is delighted to be able to deploy America’s number one public diplomacy asset – the President – in country where they are working.

But, many also recognize that a POTUS visit inflicts a lot of friction on the bilateral relationship.  Those wounds take a long time to patch over after the visit.  (Maybe that’s why the President rarely stays more than one night in any single foreign city?)

The Secret Service problem in Colombia, however, is simply the result of too many people being sent to a foreign country without enough actual work to do.  Idle hands do the devil’s work. 

Presidential visits abroad should be planned and carried out efficiently and with a low profile.  Instead, for many, they are a chance to prove the importance of an agency’s mission, an ego-boosting opportunity for “proximity to power,” and a lark for favored employees.   

Too often Air Force One leaves an indelible impression of American excess in its wake.

It is time for someone in Washington to take responsibility for Presidential visits.

2 people have commented on this article so far

Board member 

Summary: A career public diplomacy officer, Brian Carlson advises the InterMedia research organization on military and foreign affairs issues and manages communication strategies for private clients. 


Ambassador Brian E. Carlson, a former Career Minister in the United States Foreign Service, currently assists international media and audience analysis firm InterMedia on defense and diplomatic sector activities. authors name for more info

Author: Brian Carlson

We welcome comments from our readers that advocate and shed light on the subject of public diplomacy. We avoid discussion that is politically partisan, commercial in nature or offensive. To prevent inappropriate comments and spam we screen each comment before publishing it, so please excuse us if you do not see your remark right away.

Visiting delegations

Brian, I cherish what I think is an accurate fading memory of Secretary of State William Rogers arriving for a late Nixon-era official visit in Prague on a commercial flight from Helsinki with one accompanying staffer. That was sometime between 1972 and 1976. LBJ was responsible for the earlier beginning of the post-JFK elephantiasis in the White House travel routine, and Henry Kissinger was responsible for spreading the virus to the State Department in the Reagan administration. It took little subsequent encouragement for other members of the cabinet to inflate their entourages. By the time it took a five-car motorcade to get the USIA Director across Paris for a routine office appointment in 1986, all of us hosting these Byzantine progresses at posts could look back with rueful nostalgia at the innocent earlier era when all we usually had to worry about were mildly time-consuming junkets by too frequently naive congressional delegations, most often preoccupied with photo-ops and shiny souvenirs.

The major mileposts in this evolution were the Kennedy assassination, a diffuse chain of patternless foreign and domestic attacks, and - much later - 9/11, which finally tipped the planning and protection effort over the edge into bureaucratic absurdity. The conceits of the security types that they could guarantee "no surprises" merely mirrored the flaws of the long standing and wildly expensive Pentagon addiction to overkill, mindless can-do self promotion, and zero defect pretensions.

I do not disdain the skills and dedication of the participants, just the uselessness of so many caparisoned elephants...and their mahouts. My nearly five years of experiences as a spear carrier during presidentials, vice presidentials and secretarials at NATO and the EC/EU in Brussels only served to increase my sympathy for the long-suffering host staff professionals, and my embarrassment at the arrogant behavior of a few of my countrymen. I must say that it was the entire bizarre culture of all this that was far more offensive than the actions of any single individuals.

I doubt a president now has the power to more than fleetingly divert this juggernaut.

I enjoy and value your online efforts.


Necessity of Transportation

Very nice article Brian Carlson and also well written. Thanks for sharing this. Transportation do necessary at all levels and for all sorts of reasons. Whether daily transportation to offices or meetings or to other working places or transportation at weekend for vacation, everywhere we need quality transportation services. Public transportation is really very useful for us. Bus, Train and Flight, all are very necessary these days and also being used for distance travel based on the destination/tour accordingly.

For business meetings and international meetings by top officials of any country or the international tour of a President or Prime Minister of a country also being helped by transportation service. Flight services are used for international visits and also people using it for overseas tours.

Bus transportation now a prime requirement of people in each country and government of several countries now making new rules to restrict the use more of personal vehicles to protect the environment. They are now telling people to use more of public transportation.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <h2><h3><h4><h5><h6><a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <u> <span> <p class=""><img>

More information about formatting options

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.

Stay Connected

Follow the Public Diplomacy Council on Facebook and YouTube and share your opinion about up-to-date issues with us. 

For more public diplomacy events, check out PDAA's website.