I told him that our embassy was flying three Pride flags, one American flag and no Ukrainian flag.  He was surprised by my criticism but, to his credit, by the time I left some weeks later, the embassy was displaying the blue and gold colors of Ukraine in lights on its front walls after dark.  The embassy had become a Three, One, .5 diplomatic post.

Many Americans don’t realize that many of our diplomatic missions abroad fly the Pride flag prominently worldwide during June and part way into July (people often forget to take the Pride flag down promptly at the end of June).  The flag flew over our mission to the Vatican.  It even flew, I am told, on our mission to Kabul as we scrambled to evacuate our personnel and sympathetic Afghans.

I can assure you that the flag is flown without discussion or much thought by our diplomats posted abroad.  What is there to discuss?  To oppose the flag’s display would be an act of bigotry or worse.  No American diplomat wants to be thought a bigot, or to demonstrate a lack of support and appreciation for our LGBTQ colleagues, many of whom are excellent diplomats and our good friends.

But there are at least three solid diplomatic reasons to oppose the display of the Pride flag on our missions abroad.  The first reason is that the flag does not endorse mere tolerance of the many and various (and ambiguous) values and activities for which the flag stands.  The flag mandates a celebration and affirmation of all those various things.  When the LGBTQ train left the station headed to a stop called “equal rights,” many of us were aboard.  But that train did not even slow at the stop for equal rights.  Rather, it barreled forward requiring one and all to affirm and celebrate everything on that flag.  The train is still speeding forward and it is a guess where, if ever, it will stop.  Affirmation and celebration are not the same as rights and toleration.

Which brings me to the second diplomatic reason to oppose the flags ubiquity at our missions abroad.  The second reason for skepticism is the flag’s incredible and ever-expanding ambiguity.  The rainbow flag’s ambiguity means that it can have widely different meanings to different people.  For some, the flag represents respect for LGBTQ persons (more on this later). For others, it represents advocacy of same-sex marriage.  For yet others, it may represent support for transgender athletes in sports, drag queen story hour at the local library, hormone blockers for pre-teens, sexual license or opposition to traditional sexual values and mores. The flag is so ambiguous that we simply do not know what meaning people ascribe to it.

When I challenged the flag with fellow diplomats, I always started by asking them what the flag means, and they proceeded to tell me.  Often, their ideas were quite sensible.  But then I asked them what the flag means to our host nation publics and they were stumped. My fellow diplomats didn’t know how our host nation publics interpret the flag for the very good reason that we never asked our host nation publics the question. We have never tried to understand how Chinese, Russian, Polish or Ugandan people understand the rainbow flag.  And mostly, we do not care.  The various publics who see the flag flying in front of our diplomatic missions may imagine anything that they wish.

Which brings us to the third reason to oppose flying the flag outside our diplomatic missions around the world.  It is a matter of public record that those who wish us ill, often impute to the flag nefarious and strange meanings.  For example, Russian leader Vladimir Putin publicly scorned the flag outside our embassy in Moscow.  He told his Russian subjects what the flag symbolized and they mostly believed him.  So have other foreign leaders around the world opposed to American positions and values.  That is the danger of an ambiguous symbol, as any competent diplomat will know.  In diplomatic cables, every word counts.  To avoid confusion, we repeat critical words as in, “the Ambassador did not/not agree to the Foreign Minister’s timing for the summit.”  Normally, we diplomats are extremely risk averse and consequently squeamish about ambiguity.  We know the dangers of ambiguous treaties, communications and public messaging.  The exception, of course, is the Pride rainbow flag, which due to various domestic pressures, flies without much discussion or critical thought outside our diplomatic missions worldwide.

American diplomats abroad bear special responsibility to know our host cultures, avoid unnecessary offense and convey our meaning as precisely as possible.  If we are not culturally thoughtful and precise, we may cause needless offense.  Those who wish us ill, use our ambiguity against us and amplify a message that harms our national interest. Even when we are careful, we will make mistakes and must learn from them.  In the case of the Pride flag, we are not even being careful.  We are involved in a heedless rush forward due to pressures other than the pursuit of our national interest.

Internally the Department of State has engaged in groupthink.  Those with legitimate doubts and questions about the Pride flag keep silent for fear of seeming unsupportive of our colleagues, or worse.

There are better ways to support the dignity and worth of persons who identify as LGBTQ.  As Americans, we believe that every human being has dignity and deserves respect, that we are all endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights. This includes persons who identify as LGBTQ.  The current practice of flying Pride flags outside our diplomatic missions worldwide is causing untold damage to our national reputation and to our national interest.  It is past time to start a conversation where none is currently occurring.