but third, remember, the state department and the u.s. government is a giant bureaucracy, and it wouldn t work if every ambassador was e-mailing the secretary every day. instead what you have is an interagency policy process. it starts with, i m going to use a lot of acronyms here, the icp, the interagency policy committee. for me, that was russia. then the deputy s committee, the principal s committee. and you interact with your colleagues to formulate policy and deal with issues, including diplomatic security issues, which were an issue for me as ambassador out in moscow. that s a chain of command, if you will, that then goes up to the secretary, up to the president ultimately for them to make decisions. that s the way the system works. maybe it should be changed. but then we should have a debate about the system of communication in the u.s. government, because i m sure it worked this way when i was in government for five years, and i know it probably worked the same
appointed by the president of the united states. so you also have a channel to the president and to the national security staff. but third, remember, the state department and the u.s. government is a giant bureaucracy, and it wouldn t work if every ambassador was e-mailing the secretary every day. instead what you have is an interagency policy process. it starts with, i m going to use a lot of acronyms here, the icp, the interagency policy committee. for me, that was russia. then the deputy s committee, the principal s committee. and you interact with your colleagues to formulate policy and deal with issues, including diplomatic security issues, which were an issue for me as ambassador out in moscow. that s a chain of command, if you will, that then goes up to the secretary, up to the president ultimately for them to make decisions. that s the way the system works. maybe it should be changed. but then we should have a debate about the system of