Follow us on social

48170575602_7bc0a779e2_o

The State Department was broken before Donald Trump

Addressing only the offenses of the Trump administration will not help us build back a better foreign policy than we had before.

Analysis | Washington Politics

On July 28, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Democratic Staff published a new report on the state of the State Department, commissioned by Ranking Member Bob Menendez, D-N.J. Titled “Diplomacy in Crisis: The Trump Administration’s Decimation of the State Department,” the report presents an in-depth examination of this administration’s successful effort to undermine the Department’s role and effectiveness. The report focuses on the nature and impact of continued senior-level vacancies, the nomination of patently unqualified individuals for vital positions, and political attacks and retaliation against career public servants. While these topics aren’t unknown, the report spells out their extent clearly in numbers and impact.

On the day of the release, I participated in a panel discussion hosted by Senator Menendez with Ambassador Tom Shannon, former Under Secretary of State; Ambassador Barbara Stephenson, former ambassador and former President of the American Foreign Service Association; and Ambassador Bonnie Jenkins, former Coordinator for Threat Reduction Programs. Margaret Taylor, former lawyer with State’s Office of the Legal Adviser, moderated the discussion. In short, it was populated by a wealth of experience and in-depth knowledge of the role of State. You can watch the video here. The report’s recommendations were an excellent enumeration of many of the steps needed to rebuild a State Department capable of effectively executing its critical role on behalf of the American people. But the list wasn’t exhaustive.

Problems with State as an institution did not originate with this administration. In fact, the attacks undermining the department have been brutally effective precisely because each of them has exploited existing and pernicious institutional weaknesses. Addressing only the offenses of the Trump administration will not help us build back a better foreign policy than we had before.

Ambassador Stephenson raised the need to limit the number of political appointees in the Department, and I wholeheartedly support this suggestion as well. This would not only help with morale and retention in the Department, ensuring that our best civil servants have room to move up and apply their expertise, but it would minimize the short-term influence of political interests that often impede long-term strategic efforts in support of our national security. It would also keep our foreign affairs professional. Diplomacy, after all, is a learned skill which benefits tremendously from deep regional, historical, and cultural knowledge of the places where we engage across the globe. Hoteliers and handbag designers do not bring this to the job.

Ambassador Shannon, who has been steadfastly apolitical, spoke strongly, calling the report “a powerful and important indictment of behaviors that have undermined the State Department,” and said its recommendations were “the beginning of a larger conversation about what needs to be done” to ensure the State Department can do its job effectively and “ensure the peace and prosperity of the United States. Nothing less it at stake and nothing more at risk.”

I couldn’t agree more with those words, and for me, that conversation needs to include a revamping of State’s position as our lead foreign affairs agency. Professionalization is a critical step in that direction, but demilitarization of our foreign policy must also be a top priority in doing so. As I said during my own remarks, the report did not address this key factor in the State Department’s shrinking seat at the national security table. The State Department’s influence and role has been diminished by growing numbers of political appointees, which would never be acceptable in the Pentagon; a National Security Council that has, in many ways, supplanted the Department; and the primacy given to the military as our solution of first resort for many years.

These problems did not begin with this administration, but they could end with the opportunity I hope will emerge in a few months — a chance to begin a true rebuilding of our foreign policy out of the ashes of what the Trump administration has left behind.

A bigger budget and larger diplomatic corps will not be enough. We must bring the State Department back to its rightful place, leading our foreign affairs engagement with diplomacy as our tool of first resort, respecting expertise, and giving our civilian foreign affairs professionals not only the authority they need, but the resources they need to use it. 


Secretary of State Mike Pompeo addresses his remarks to military personnel and their families Sunday, June 30, 2019, at Osan Air Base, Korea. (Official White House Photo by Shealah Dufour)
Analysis | Washington Politics
Mike Waltz: Drop Ukraine draft age to 18
Top Photo: Incoming National Security Advisor Mike Waltz on ABC News on January 12, 2025

Mike Waltz: Drop Ukraine draft age to 18

QiOSK

Following a reported push from the Biden administration in late 2024, Mike Waltz - President-elect Donald Trump’s NSA pick - is now advocating publicly that Ukraine lower its draft age to 18, “Their draft age right now is 26 years old, not 18 ... They could generate hundreds of thousands of new soldiers," he told ABC This Week on Sunday.

Ukraine needs to "be all in for democracy," said Waltz. However, any push to lower the draft age is unpopular in Ukraine. Al Jazeera interviewed Ukrainians to gauge the popularity of the war, and raised the question of lowering the draft age, which had been suggested by Biden officials in December. A 20-year-old service member named Vladislav said in an interview that lowering the draft age would be a “bad idea.”

keep readingShow less
AEI
Top image credit: DCStockPhotography / Shutterstock.com

AEI would print money for the Pentagon if it could

QiOSK

The American Enterprise Institute has officially entered the competition for which establishment DC think tank can come up with the most tortured argument for increasing America’s already enormous Pentagon budget.

Its angle — presented in a new report written by Elaine McCusker and Fred "Iraq Surge" Kagan — is that a Russian victory in Ukraine will require over $800 billion in additional dollars over five years for the Defense Department, whose budget is already poised to push past $1 trillion per year.

keep readingShow less
Biden weapons Ukraine
Top Image Credit: Diplomacy Watch: US empties more weapons stockpiles for Ukraine ahead of Biden exit

Diplomacy Watch: Biden unleashes stockpiles to Ukraine ahead of exit

QiOSK

The Biden administration is putting together a final Ukraine aid package — about $500 million in weapons assistance — as announced in Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s final meeting with the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, which coordinates weapons support to Ukraine.

The capabilities in the announcement include small arms and ammunition, communications equipment, AIM-7, RIM-7, and AIM-9M missiles, and F-16 air support.

keep readingShow less

Trump transition

Latest

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.