Karen Genzink - Senior
I appreciated Ambassador Garvelink’s presence in our classroom today; it was good for me to listen to him- a leader in our government, spokesman for our nation, and ambassador to the world- and to be able to hear some of the good that is going on in the world.
As I read the headlines from Aljazeera every day, watch horrific acts of violence unfold in the movies we view in class, and read what Samantha Power (in A Problem From Hell: America and the Age of Genocide) has to say about the United States’ chronic tendency to ignore such horrors known as genocide in the last century, I often feel a deep sense of frustration and anger with the U.S. government’s perceived inaction throughout the world. The current situation in Iraq, and America’s current response to it, is discouraging. The perception of the United States that many other nations hold is discouraging. The fact that nearly every top story being told by today’s news agencies is grim, gruesome, and ugly is discouraging.
Our class on genocide is, at times, discouraging. What I appreciated about today is that we met a man (January Series speaker William Garvelink) who was, in that one hour, the United States government to me: even though he is only one man out of thousands in the layers and layers of bureaucracy, he, to me, represented hope for those of us who do see the devastation and injustice in the world and the government’s imperfect responses to them, but who also recognize the need to fight them with hope that change is possible.
The Ambassador’s impressive experience working abroad in numerous nations, his knowledge of what has been and what is going on in the world today in terms of humanitarian disasters and abuses, and his openness with us about them gave him a credibility that made me respect and admire him. I do not know many men his age from his background (I know some Garvelinks…and I’m pretty sure they’re all Dutch Reformed!)—probably much like my own dad’s background—that are so in-tune with issues like genocide, disaster response, and human rights issues like rape in Eastern Congo, and it was refreshing to see someone so close to home in such an important leadership position, using that position and the power that comes with it for good. I found the Ambassador’s personal story interesting: when he was in college he knew nothing about the genocide occurring at that time in Cambodia- he said plainly that then he didn’t even care! It is really great to see how God uses our experiences from the past to lead us to places where we cannot now even imagine.
I was encouraged today by Ambassador Garvelink’s excitement for the Foreign Service and what it does for others and what it did for him. Sometimes, being in so many development classes and international relations classes, it is too easy to bash government bureaucracies and organizations for various reasons (mismanagement of funds, corruption, etc.), but he seemed to hold the Foreign Service—both the position of Foreign Service Officers as well as USAID—in high esteem.
One thing I did want to ask him but didn’t (I couldn’t find a way to word the question in the right way to articulate what I wanted to really get at…) was what he thinks about the way that the Foreign Service and USAID works with local people to tackle the issues that matter most to them, rather than to the United States government. So many times, I feel, the U.S. government goes into another country with a big bang and, upon entry, quickly writes a prescription for that nation or situation (without conducting the needed tests) so that the wounds heal quickly. Deep wounds take a long time to heal, though, and being a development major, I have to question why, after billions and billions of dollars have been poured into the continent of Africa in humanitarian aid over the past three decades, we still are fighting ethnic wars, famine, and corruption. The wounds are deep, and I sometimes question if the U.S. government should be the one to act as both policeman and doctor. While I think there is a major role for the U.S. government to play in world disasters and conflicts, I think it must be careful how it handles this role.
These are questions I wonder about, and I enjoyed listening to Ambassador Garvelink because I felt like he appreciates these questions as well, has contemplated them, and after years in the Foreign Service, is still contemplating them.
