2013 Alumni Excellence Award Recipient: Ambassador Philip S. Goldberg ’74

Q. After you graduated from Boston University with a degree in journalism and history, you served for seven years as liaison between the city of New York and the United Nations and its consular community. Why did that position appeal to you?

A. I always had an interest in politics and government – not necessarily in foreign affairs, but an interest in the world, and I hadn’t traveled a lot, so it struck my interest. When I was in my early teens, my parents gave me a short wave radio the size of a television set, and I would listen to broadcasts from around the world, from Moscow, and Radio This and Radio That. And I read The New York Times and other newspapers – I was always kind of aware and interested in what was going on in the world. Things were very different then in terms of thinking globally. Now it’s so much easier with the Internet; then, you really had to look for information and be interested.

Q. How did you end up in the Foreign Service?

A. A little bit by accident. I had come to a fork in the road. I didn’t want to just go from one job to another. Unlike this generation which is a lot more willing to change jobs, I wanted a career. So while I was considering going to law school, I also had a good friend who was applying to the Foreign Service, and he suggested I take the test with him. Then you had to take a rigorous written test, then orals, a background investigation, medical history, and so on. Recruitment was sort of like the way you’d hire a young executive in a company – they would expect you to spend your career with the company. Now the hiring process puts more emphasis on people in their late twenties or early thirties who have more experience, fluency in languages, and have loved overseas.

So I took the test, went through the rest of the process, was accepted, and joined. Sometimes you have to go with your instincts. I definitely took a riskier choice in joining the service – moving every two or three years, having all kinds of different demands put on me. But I’ve had a great time and continue to enjoy the work and learn something new every day.

Q. You held a series of positions – in South Africa, then in Colombia, Chile, and Bolivia – seven years overall in South America.

A. Yes, when I took a course at Rivers with Mr. (Andy) Navoni in Latin American history, I never thought I’d live in South America for that long. Before my posting in Colombia, I went to school daily for six months to study Spanish. After three postings, I’m fluent in Spanish by State Department standards, meaning I can go on television and make statements and do business in Spanish.

Q. You served from 1994-96 as the State Department’s Bosnia desk officer and were chief of staff for the American delegation and a member of the American negotiating team in the lead-up to the Dayton Peace Conference, where the leaders of Bosnia, Serbia, and Croatia agreed to end the Bosnian war…

A. That was probably one of the most satisfying times of my career, after having been the most depressing. I was in Bosnia for long periods but also working from here for Ambassador Richard Holbrooke who led the negotiations during that period, watching the terrible things happening there and the foreign policy paralysis in which we were talking but not doing anything. But then the situation changed on the ground and renewed will got us through the negotiations all the way to Dayton.

It was hugely satisfying on a personal and professional level because it shows in this profession the difference you can make – even as a junior player I was involved in something really important – a peace agreement. It shows why you go into something like this. For people who want to do international work, you can do very satisfying things working for NGOs or companies, but it’s unique when you represent your country. Later, I worked on the Kosovo conflict and was chief of mission there. I was on a more senior level where I had a bigger impact on something than at any other time in my career. So again, it’s the ability to have an impact that is really unique.

Q. You were appointed Ambassador to Bolivia in 2006 and ended up returning to the United States in 2008, amidst deteriorating diplomatic relations. How did that come about?

A. I’ll give you a shortened version. Our attempt was to make the best of a bad situation, to see where there was a convergence of interests between the countries. What we were working on was not just the counter-narcotics issue; we had $90 million in assistance programs – some went to alternative development programs to wean people off coca growing, but there were medical and educational programs, a whole panoply. Unfortunately when the government was faced with internal opposition, it claimed there was a conspiracy. This was not surprising given Bolivian President Morales’ historic antipathy for the U.S. and his close relationship with Hugo Chavez in Venezuela.

It’s a sad story, really. Our attempt to work with the government became a factor in why they thought we were trying to interfere in their affairs. It’s an object lesson writ large in many places around the world. Because we have an interest, because we’re active, and our foreign policy and embassies try to do things, sometimes our actions are misrepresented.

Q. After being sworn in as head of the INR in February 2010, you also served for several months as coordinator for the implementation of the United Nations Security Council resolution imposing economic and commercial sanctions on North Korea after their underground nuclear test in 2009. How do you feel now about being behind a desk and not in the field?

A. That’s the thing about the Foreign Service, at least the political officers – you generally spend half your career overseas and half in Washington. Managing a bureau of the State Department as well as an element within the intelligence community now means having lots of different challenges and dealing with important national security issues. You’re where the policy is being made and you’re with the top level policy makers, but it is different than being overseas. Most Foreign Service officers join the Service because we enjoy being overseas.

I’ve actually enjoyed everything I’ve done in Washington, from working in the ’90s on Bosnia with Ambassador Holbrooke, then with Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott, to working more recently with Secretary Clinton on imposing sanctions on North Korea and as Assistant Secretary for Intelligence and Research. Working closely with her at the State Department and with officials at the White House and the entire government has been a great honor.