Why the U.S. Needs Its Envoys

Particularly at the Organization of Islamic Cooperation

image from

By Arsalan Suleman, Foreign Affairs

Over the past few months, U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has undertaken a radical shakeup of his department and has expressed a desire to remove a number of special envoys and representatives. Although it is healthy to prune positions that have become redundant or obsolete, reckless downsizing without the proper replacement for key functions could damage national security. The U.S. special envoy to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is one such position that if removed would eliminate a proven platform for building constructive partnerships with Muslim-majority countries and communities on core national security issues. In fact, given the spread of global terrorism and the ongoing conflicts and humanitarian crises in OIC member countries over the last few years, the position should be not only maintained but also enhanced.

Since 2008, the special envoy to the OIC, which was created at the tail end of President George W. Bush’s administration, has represented the United States at the OIC, a 57-member international organization made up of states with substantial Muslim populations. Its membership spans the globe and includes some of the United States’ closest allies, such as the NATO members Albania and Turkey, and half of its major non-NATO allies (Afghanistan, Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, Pakistan, and Tunisia). The OIC actively engages with the United States on a wide variety of issues, such as conflict resolution, countering extremism, humanitarian affairs, human rights, and economic development.

At first, the special envoy to the OIC focused principally on efforts, through public diplomacy, to engage with Muslim communities around the world. This was motivated in large part by the need to demonstrate, in the aftermath of the disastrous U.S.-led invasion of Iraq and the ongoing quagmire in Afghanistan, that the United States was not at war with Islam. But in 2010, President Barack Obama broadened the envoy’s mandate to deepen and expand U.S. partnerships with the OIC, in line with what he had advocated in his June 2009 speech in Cairo. He had called for “a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world,” and so he added several much-needed areas of collaboration, such as conflict resolution; humanitarian affairs; health, science, and technology; human rights; entrepreneurship; and countering violent extremism. ...

[T]he special envoy’s substantial track record justifies elevating the role to an ambassadorship, which would guarantee that the position receive the resources it needs to continue its mandate. Right now, the special envoy lacks dedicated funding and staffing and does not have a fixed placement within the State Department. Creating an ambassadorship need not be difficult. The United States already has a consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, where the OIC is based, and has room to house an ambassador. What’s more, the United States has ambassadors for other regional organizations of which it is not a member, such as the European Union, the African Union, and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. It’s time to create one for the OIC.

The power to create such a position lies with Congress, but the special envoy to the OIC is of bipartisan lineage—begun by Bush and expanded by Obama—and should therefore continue as such. President Donald Trump already tacitly demonstrated support for U.S. outreach to OIC members during his trip to Saudi Arabia in May, where he led the Arab Islamic American Summit, which included all of the OIC’s members except Iran and Syria. As Tillerson decides on which positions to eliminate, he should not only maintain the role of the special envoy to the OIC but also recommend that Congress upgrade it to an ambassadorship.