Photo credit: www.govexec.com

Trump Administration’s Controversial State Department Reorganization Proposal

The Trump administration is attempting to distance itself from a controversial draft executive order that has circulated among State Department employees, proposing significant changes to the current structure of the diplomatic corps. The document suggests a major reduction in the non-partisan career diplomatic force and calls for the closure of numerous embassies worldwide.

This proposed executive order, which was first reported by Government Executive, aims to abolish the Foreign Service Officer Test and implement new hiring criteria that would prioritize traits such as “demonstrated charisma,” “verbal authenticity,” and “diplomatic appearance.” Notably, alignment with the president’s foreign policy vision would be a critical factor, with the White House required to approve all new hires to ensure adherence to the administration’s objectives.

Typically, career Foreign Service officers are tasked with executing the policies of the sitting administration while maintaining their non-partisan status. The draft order, however, seeks to fundamentally change this model by transforming these diplomats into regional specialists, limiting their assignments strictly to specific areas rather than allowing for a more generalized and versatile approach.

As news of the draft surfaced over the weekend, it prompted a swift response from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who labelled the reports as “fake news,” claiming that the coverage was based on misleading information. A spokesperson for the State Department echoed this sentiment, stating that the reporting was “entirely based on a fake document” but did not delve into the specifics of the issues raised in the draft.

Sources indicate that the controversial document may have originated with Pete Marocco, a recently removed political appointee at the State Department, who previously played a significant role in dismantling programs at the U.S. Agency for International Development.

The draft executive order outlines an opportunity for both foreign and civil service personnel to accept buyouts by September 30, 2025. Numerous State Department employees have expressed anticipation of an imminent reorganization announcement, which may come as early as April 22. Reports suggest that the forthcoming plan will include buyout and early retirement options for an expected number of approximately 2,700 staff members.

If enacted, the order would lead to the elimination of several departments within the State Department, including the Africa bureau, which would be supplanted by a new Special Envoy Office for African Affairs directly reporting to the White House. Subsequently, Rubio would decide the essential sub-Saharan embassies, resulting in the closure of others deemed non-essential.

Additional offices focused on critical areas such as climate change, public diplomacy, democracy, and human rights would also face elimination or consolidation, raising concerns about potential layoffs amongst affected employees. The document specifies a new Bureau of Humanitarian Affairs aimed at absorbing essential duties from USAID, which the current administration has effectively curtailed.

Employees would be mandated to execute the president’s foreign policy according to a newly defined Strategic Cohesion Doctrine, emphasizing unified mission execution and operational alignment. However, the draft purportedly safeguards employees’ personal political beliefs, indicating they could maintain dissenting views as long as they complied with department expectations, including both on-duty and off-duty conduct.

The American Foreign Service Association, the organization representing Foreign Service Officers, has voiced concerns about the ramifications of the leak, stressing that even the prospect of such changes can have a deteriorating impact on morale within the department. Their statement highlighted that “reorganization of the State Department by leaks and confusion isn’t a strategy—it’s a recipe for failure,” stressing that regardless of the outcome, the fallout could lead to a demoralized workforce and a weakened diplomatic presence for the United States.

The draft order included an aggressive timeline for implementing its proposed changes, with a deadline of October 1, sparking skepticism among employees about the feasibility of such an ambitious plan.

Current Foreign Service officers have expressed alarm over plans to close the Public Diplomacy office, labeling it a drastic departure from established policy given the global landscape of competing narratives propagated by various state-controlled media outlets. This office plays a crucial role in countering foreign disinformation, and the administration’s previous initiatives, including efforts to eliminate the U.S. Agency for Global Media, have raised additional concerns about the future of U.S. information dissemination abroad.

Comments from employees suggest a disconnect between the proposed reorganizational structure and the operational realities of the department. For instance, merging the Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations with the Office of Foreign Missions—a body overseeing foreign operations in the U.S.—was illustrated as a misguided move that disregards the intricate nature of managing overseas operations.

Critiques from within the service also highlight that such a transformative plan appears counterintuitive to the administration’s stated goals of opposing foreign adversaries like China and Iran while simultaneously fostering American exports and protecting citizens abroad. As voiced by one current Foreign Service officer, “This reorganization and downsizing will make it harder to sell U.S. products and secure American interests worldwide.”

Source
www.govexec.com