f_0018764_16046 - Embassy Architecture: Time to Stop,...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Spring 2010 The Ambassadors REVIEW 19 Embassy Architecture: Time to Stop, Review and Rethink Victor H. Ashe United States Ambassador to Poland, 2004-2009 he physical face of the United States overseas is often the embassy building. While technically, it may be the ambassador, he/she usually changes every three years, and most citizens of the host country do not meet the Chief of Mission but they do see the embassy. It is there for decades. Buildings make a statement about who we are and what we stand for. Architecture matters. Design is important. After the tragic bombings of the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania followed by the attack on the World Trade Center, new requirements were imposed on embassy and consulate constructions. Diplomatic security became involved in the design process. The requirement of a 100 foot setback on all four sides of an embassy makes it impossible in many cases to build an embassy in the central part of most capital cities. Consequently, new American embassies are now located away from the downtown or historic part of a city as evidenced by our embassies in Zagreb, Croatia; Tunis, Tunisia; and most recently in London where a new embassy is proposed for an isolated site in a light industry zone south of the Thames partially enclosed by a moat. Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle do not have moats for protection or aesthetics. I should acknowledge that the Department of State did appoint a commission to study designs for the proposed new London embassy, although the commission members were not unanimous in their vote on the final design. However, design commissions should be used worldwide, and incumbent ambassadors should feel free to weigh in on the design when it is so obviously unattractive and projects an image of America in fear. These embassy designs invariably connote a fortress (or even a prison) with narrow windows. Often, these buildings are just plain ugly and stick out like sore thumbs. The cost of these new structures is incredibly high. American taxpayers will spend over $1 billion (yes, one billion) in London for the new embassy. In Krakow, a new consulate (if built)— where only ten American employees would work—will exceed $80 million, and $600,000 has already been spent in site surveys, trips and appraisals over the past 12 years with nothing to show for the effort to date. If Poland reaches visa waiver status, the number of
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 01/25/2012 for the course COMM 321 taught by Professor Erinmcclellan during the Spring '11 term at Boise State.

Page1 / 3

f_0018764_16046 - Embassy Architecture: Time to Stop,...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online