Jonathan Rose on What Diplomacy Really Looks Like, Crisis Decision-Making, and the Hidden Costs of Serving Abroad

Jonathan Rose is a U.S. Foreign Service Officer who has spent the past fourteen years working across the day-to-day machinery of American diplomacy—starting in the State Department’s Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, then serving overseas in places including Saudi Arabia and the Philippines, and later rotating through Washington assignments that touched cyber and digital policy, Congress, and religious freedom.
In this conversation for The Pathway Blog, Rose breaks down what the job actually is (and isn’t); why most diplomacy is slow, incremental work; what negotiations look like in practice; how to stay disciplined in moments of crisis; and what young people should understand about both the rewards and the personal tradeoffs of a life spent moving from post to post.

This transcript has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

A Career Without a Neat Narrative
Benjamin Wolf: For readers who may not know your path, what’s been the through line of your career—and what problem have you consistently tried to work on?

Jonny Rose: I’ll give a quick summary of how I got to where I am today, but I want to preface it by saying: we should all be skeptical of folks who present a very clear narrative of their careers.
In retrospect, it’s always easy to craft a story--and then I did this, and for this reason I did that—but the reality is there’s a lot of randomness. There’s a lot more trying things that didn’t work out that folks often conveniently leave off of their LinkedIn pages and such.
Having said that: I grew up in Connecticut, then came to Georgetown in 2006, a few years after 9/11 and the U.S. invasion of Iraq, when Middle East policy was very front and center. I started studying Arabic and the history and politics of the Middle East, and spent a lot of time in the region as an undergrad. As a Jewish American, I really appreciated the opportunity to engage in dialogue with Arab and Muslim communities—to talk about issues and try to build understanding. Those were formative experiences for me, and they’ve guided my career much to this day.
I ended up staying at Georgetown for an extra year to do a combined Bachelor’s/Master’s degree at the Center for Contemporary Arab Studies. From there, I went to the State Department as a Presidential Management Fellow. I worked as a civil servant in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs for a few years on a number of country desks, focusing on U.S. relations with Jordan, Lebanon, and Egypt, and had the chance to go to our embassy in Cairo for a few months on a temporary assignment.
I really enjoyed the work and found it very interesting, and so decided to switch over to the Foreign Service side. My first assignment was in Saudi Arabia, then the Philippines. Since then, I’ve had a number of assignments in Washington, including in the Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital Policy. I also did an assignment in Congress as a Pearson Fellow, and I’m currently with the Office of International Religious Freedom.
 
From PMF to Foreign Service: Strategy vs. Curiosity
BW: You said you’re skeptical of people who claim there’s a straight through line in their careers. When you were moving from your PMF work to the Foreign Service, what was your sense of where your career was heading then? Were you uncertain entering the Foreign Service, or was that something you wanted to do since undergrad?

JR: Here’s the thing: When I arrived at Georgetown, I was not thinking about the Foreign Service at all. I was an undecided major. I wasn’t even initially in the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown.
In my first year, I quickly took to my Middle East studies courses, so I switched into the School of Foreign Service and started studying Arabic. Even at that time, I didn’t necessarily see myself going into government.
But as I entered my Master’s program, thought more about future paths, and then was a recipient of the Presidential Management Fellowship, government service seemed like an interesting and unique opportunity, so I went for it—and here I am fourteen years later.
Especially early on, I was not necessarily pursuing my career in a very strategic way. I was taking assignments and thinking, Oh, I didn’t like that as much—maybe I’ll try something else. Or, That seems really interesting—let’s go do that.
When I talk to young people about how to structure their careers, I usually advise them to be 70% driven by what’s interesting and exciting to them, and maybe 30% thinking about the medium- and long-term plan if they pursued a particular path. 
 
What Diplomacy Actually Looks Like Day-to-Day
BW: For people outside government, the State Department can often feel opaque in terms of the work it does. In your time at State, what did you find was most misunderstood about how diplomacy works on a day-to-day level?

JR: We have this image in our head about different careers—medicine, diplomacy, anything—that’s often very different from the day-to-day.
On TV, doctors are often performing emergency surgery—rushing in, operating—but as we know, that’s a very small percentage of medical work. Same with lawyers—the TV image of litigating in front of a judge is of course a tiny percentage of what most lawyers do.
And same with diplomacy—Our image is people in tuxedos clinking glasses with other diplomats, telling fancy stories—that’s maybe 1% of the work. Most of it is writing reports, going to meetings, having important conversations—but not often “sexy” or high-profile work.
Diplomacy is slow. It’s incremental. It’s absolutely crucial, but you often don’t get to see the fruits of your labor—certainly rarely in the short term. Sometimes in the medium or long term you’ll see things develop in a way you helped shape. But it takes time. It’s slow, steady work.
 
How Negotiations Really Work
JR: I’ll give one example. When I was working in the Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital Policy, I was involved in negotiations for a compact at the OECD—the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development—related to protecting freedom of speech.
After over a year of negotiation, the compact was finalized, but only after I had left the office. And here’s the thing—that was still just the first step. Once the compact is in place, it’s basically a framework of guidelines for countries to use to implement legislation on that topic if they want. It’s a best practices document. The actual effects—dependent on countries passing and implementing legislation—are potentially years down the line.

BW: Within those negotiations, is it mostly one-on-one meetings with another representative—knowing what you want, what you can give up—or is it more like email exchanges and internal back-and-forth?

JR: It’s all of that.
You’ll have a long draft document that has to be reviewed by various subject matter experts within the State Department and elsewhere in the U.S. government, especially the lawyers. That’s where the art of diplomacy comes in. We know the U.S. ideal outcome. We know our red lines—what we simply cannot accept. The question is: how close can we get the final document to the ideal outcome? Where are we going to yield in the desire to get a final deal?
You have to have good relationships with interlocutors from other countries. You have to understand what their constraints are. You have to build coalitions with other countries—get them to help you on some things, and help them on other things. That’s the magic.
 
Decision-Making in Moments of Crisis
BW: Working within governance and foreign affairs for fourteen years now, what are the first questions you ask in periods of crisis to avoid reacting to noise and decide what’s actually worth focusing on?

JR: In a crisis situation, the first thing you want to understand is: what are the decision points? What’s the timeline? Do we need a decision in 30 minutes? In 12 hours? In a week?
That tells you how much time you have to gather information, understand context, and ask: is there precedent? What happened last time?
We see on TV this idea of quick and decisive action, and there’s a place for that. But the best decisions are informed by context and information gathered through engaging with those in the know, keeping abreast of the latest developments, and so on.
I’ll give a less consequential example, but I think it’s instructive. In a previous assignment—I can’t get into too many details—we received a gift from the leader of an allied country of perishable food that was intended for the White House. There were a number of hurdles: The food showed up at a U.S. airport—how do we get it through customs in light of Department of Agriculture regulations? And generally, it’s very difficult to give food gifts to high-ranking U.S. officials because of safety concerns—anything from food poisoning to more sinister possibilities.
So we had to take it step by step: What do we need to do tonight? Is the food refrigerated? Is there danger it spoils? Who are our interlocutors elsewhere in the U.S. government—who can we talk to about this basically novel issue, at least to us. So you gather information, you go to your contacts, and you keep your higher-ups informed.
 
A Habit That Matters: Reading Cables
BW: What have been some of the most effective habits—or moments where you consistently approached the work with a mindset—that you think contributed to your success?

JR: Reading cables. That’s definitely something I prioritize and I think is important.
We like to joke that within the State Department, we have a “foreign affairs magazine” with the lowest circulation in the world—and that’s our diplomatic cable distribution: reports from U.S. embassies and consulates around the world that go back to Washington, and to other embassies.
They have a real wealth of information because our diplomats overseas engage with consequential people—business executives, politicians, civil society leaders, and many more—and they send that information back to Washington. I always prioritized reading those reports to make sure I understand what was happening on the ground.
 
What Separates a Great Memo from an Average One
BW: On that note, what separates a truly effective policy memo or cable from an average one? Framing, clarity, evidence, the ask?

JR: Most simply: value add.
These days there’s so much open-source information available compared to, say, fifty years ago.  Back then, people didn’t have news alerts on cell phones. If there was breaking news in another country, sometimes embassy reporting was providing context that wasn’t available elsewhere.
Now, a lot of information is readily available through news and social media, so the best cables I’ve seen do two things:
First, they combine reporting from different offices and functions within the embassy, including the political, economic, military, and other aspects. Bringing in different forms of expertise makes something extremely effective.
Second, sometimes cables are written jointly across countries—multiple embassies reporting together—which can be very useful because that reveals macro trends. I’m excited to see how AI will allow us to do this more effectively and detect those trends across reporting.
 
Rewards: Perspective on the United States
BW: What’s been the most rewarding part of the last fourteen years for you?

JR: The people—and the perspective.
Embassies have all sorts of folks: military, State Department, Department of Commerce, USAID, Department of Homeland Security, and on. They represent different facets of American society. And when you’re making decisions in an embassy, you’re balancing different interests.
Being in the Foreign Service gives you a more balanced perspective on the United States. It lets you see the great things about the U.S., but also the things we need to work on, in the context of living in other countries.
It also makes you thankful for what we have. I’ve met amazing people in many countries achieving incredible things within their circumstances, but they make me think: If this person were in the U.S., they’d be able to achieve so much more.
That’s not to say the U.S. is a utopia—you also notice the flaws and challenges, both through comparison and because foreigners ask you pointed questions about various aspects of American society and culture. Overall, gaining perspective on the United States is something I’ve found very valuable.
 
Costs: Security, Distance, and Missing Life at Home
BW: On the flip side: what’s the least discussed cost of national security and foreign policy work—something you didn’t fully consider before entering the field?

JR: I’ll answer in two ways.
Institutionally, security is a major challenge. U.S. diplomats are under constant threat, with a recent high-profile example of this being the murder of Ambassador Chris Stevens and other embassy staff in Benghazi in 2012, and when incidents like that happen, security requirements rightfully increase for U.S. embassies around the world.
Today, when we build new embassies, they have specific and extensive security requirements. That often means embassies are not in the city center, where meeting security requirements is often more challenging. That makes the work of diplomacy harder--having lunch with a contact takes more travel, more coordination. Security requirements are absolutely necessary—American diplomats are targeted in many countries—and balancing those demands with the work of diplomacy is an ongoing challenge.
On a personal level, spending long periods abroad can be super fun and rewarding, but sometimes it also means missing important events back home—birthdays, weddings, funerals. Friendships can be harder to maintain if you’re moving from place to place. Frequent moves and spending the majority of your time abroad can be a challenge for one’s personal life.  
 
Advice to Students: Curiosity, Conversations, and Cold Outreach
BW: If you were advising a student trying to enter this field, what would you tell them about experiences or habits—perhaps things you did in college—that set you up for success?

JR: Find things that interest you and spend time engaging on those issues.
At your university, there are probably professors doing interesting work on topics you care about—and they’re often looking for research assistants. That’s a way to get experience.
If you’re in a big city with government agencies, nonprofits, or private-sector organizations, internships in a field of interest are another way to get experience.
And as you do those things, take the time to have conversations with people. Have coffee or lunch with them and ask them what their work actually looks like—what they love, what they hate. People are usually very happy to talk. And sometimes the most important things in those conversations are the things left unsaid -- how do people talk about their careers? Do they have regrets? Are they excited about what’s next?
Also, don’t be afraid to cold-call on LinkedIn or by email. Most people are eager to chat with students and give advice, even if they don’t know you. Put yourself out there!
 
Two Book Recommendations
BW: Last question—as is customary with the blog—if there’s a student interested in this field and wanting to follow a pathway like yours, what’s a book, essay, or piece of literature they should read, and why?

JR: I’ll give two books—one fiction, one nonfiction. They’re both coincidentally about the Vietnam War, but they focus on very different aspects.
On the fiction side: The Sympathizer by Viet Thanh Nguyen. It’s a spy novel and a refugee story—really fantastic. It grapples with the role of America in the world, and what that looks like domestically and internationally.
The other book is Diplomats at War by Charles Trueheart. It’s about the real-life relationship between the author’s father, William Trueheart, who was Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Saigon, and his boss and close friend, Ambassador Frederick Nolting. It shows how their friendship fell apart because of policy disagreements about the war and how events unfolded. It’s compelling because you get the work perspective, the family perspective, the bureaucratic wrangling within the U.S. government, the geopolitical context, and more.

BW: I’m actually going to Vietnam this summer for about a month through an international studies program at Tulane, so I’m definitely going to check those out before I go. Jonny, thank you again for your time. This has been incredibly informative. It’s been a real honor.

JR: Thanks so much for having me.