Secretary Rubio has been leading the charge to clean up the State Department’s bloated bureaucracy since he took office. He has been one of the cabinet members leading the way in implementing President Trump’s DOGE agenda by cutting waste, fraud, and abuse at the agency he leads. The most notable of these efforts was, of course, the shutdown of USAID, which many conservatives supported after DOGE revealed billions of dollars in corruption and anti-American spending at the agency.
However, after the Trump administration won its most recent victory over the deep state with a SCOTUS ruling upholding its right to terminate federal employees, Rubio has moved on to cuts at the State Department itself.
This has prompted many people, including some conservatives, to question whether Rubio is going too far with his cost-saving initiative. People are asking whether these cuts will ultimately harm America’s ability to conduct diplomacy effectively, and some have suggested that a brain drain in the foreign service could negatively impact important work. Let’s break down what these cuts are really about and whether these fears are founded.
First, these cuts are not just about cost-cutting initiatives. As Rubio and State Department Spokesperson Tammy Bruce have said many times, these cuts are part of a larger initiative to remake the State Department into an effective 21st-century tool for diplomacy. The majority of the cuts are aimed at bureaus in the state’s Washington, D.C. headquarters, and not at foreign service officers stationed abroad. Secretary Rubio has explained that these DC bureaus became repetitive of the work that many foreign service officers were doing abroad and caused extra delays through an arduous approval process that slowed intergovernmental collaboration. The work and life of a diplomat happen abroad, which is just part of the deal when you sign on to work in diplomacy. By reorienting the work to those who are actually abroad, receiving the most up-to-date information through their lived experience rather than filtered through biased think tank research, Rubio is actually making the State Department a more trusted and relevant source for the Government and the American people. Those who argue against these cuts aimed at making the State Department able to move at the “speed of relevancy” for the 21st century, as Rubio has described it, are missing the point. This work actually supports and increases the credibility and authority of the State Department within the federal government which is a good thing as studies have shown that much of American diplomacy and statecraft has moved next door to the Pentagon over the last few decades due to the State Department’s reputation for being difficult to work with. Those who are true believers in diplomacy will support these cuts, as I believe it is much better to give the State Department and the path of diplomacy as much legitimacy as possible to counter Washington’s tendency to be an endless war machine.
Recommended
Secondly, these cuts resulted in some foreign service officers, as well as many experienced bureaucrats, exiting career State Department positions. But jumping to the conclusion that this will lead to some kind of brain drain on the foreign service is premature. One could argue that cleaning up the workforce and removing subversive elements from the government will actually leave room for those with the right motives to finally share their knowledge and expertise. It is no secret that there are individuals within the State Department and across the federal government who have been working against American interests. This is evidenced, first and foremost, by the leaks and politicization of intelligence that have intensified over the last decade.
Additionally, while experience and relationships are certainly valuable tools in diplomacy, they are not the only elements that matter when it comes to executing successful diplomatic work. We shouldn’t underestimate the importance of having young, energetic, and maybe even idealistic people working in the State Department who aren’t afraid to try new things and haven’t been jaded by years of bureaucratic oppression. As we enter America’s golden age, embracing the fast-paced changes of the 21st century, such as the adoption of AI, the digital media landscape, and scientific advancements, we should allow room for young people who want to serve their country to bring their knowledge to the table. This won’t diminish the wisdom of more experienced diplomats who are there for the right reasons; it will enhance their effectiveness and give the United States an edge as we take on the challenges of the future.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member