Retribution is not the way to fix issues in State Department

A former State Department colleague of mine has been sharing on Facebook the stories of Foreign Service Officers who were part of the Reduction in Force on July 11th.

This story is, in many ways, typical:

“I was due to begin my next job in Ukraine four days ago. I was thrilled to receive my assignment to the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv in August 2024, but soon after that, I was diagnosed with breast cancer. I fought it, and kept working while getting cancer treatments. By December, I was doing better and my medical clearance was renewed. “I was still prepared to serve in Kyiv, even though I would be serving apart from my family — my children were planning to stay with my spouse, who is also a Foreign Service Officer. I had previously served in Ukraine, and my family and I made a decision that I would return for a one-year tour to serve our country. “I had my plane tickets to Poland booked, my train ticket from Krakow to Kyiv (since the only way to get to Kyiv now is on a train), my consultations in D.C., all confirmed, my hotels booked, and my orders all ready to go. “Instead, I was fired on July 11, because I had previously worked in the Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations on the Global Fragility Act (first signed into law by President Trump). Now we have an urgent vacancy at our Embassy in Ukraine at a time of great need. I could beat cancer, but I could not overcome DOGE.”

This is a common story because so many of the officers who were RIF’d were let go because they had recently served in an office that was designated for elimination for ideological reasons, but they had already left that office and were preparing for a new assignment, often overseas.

A recent posting told the story of an officer whose car and household effects were already at sea on their way to his new post when he was RIF’d, again because of where he previously — but no longer — served.

These RIF’d officers, on the whole, were not the low hanging fruit of officers still in their probationary phase. These are stories of veteran officers with strong, desperately needed language skills, numerous awards, and experience that cannot be easily replaced. The RIFs were not based on performance but on a fleeting association with a particular office that was out of favor with the administration.

This is not to argue that no Foreign Service Officer should ever face a RIF or that the State Department should not be reformed or that for budgetary reasons the cadre of FSOs cannot be reduced, even though their numbers have not kept up with the demands placed on the Department.

Working with the Congress to achieve thoughtful reform, attrition, voluntary buyouts, and the normal churn of the personnel system have always been more efficient.

Nick Burns, a career officer who served both Democratic and Republican presidents and who rose to be our Ambassador to China wrote in an open letter in the Atlantic to the dismissed employees:

“No, this is not about reform. It is about retribution. It is about breaking people and breaking institutions by sowing fear and mistrust throughout our government. It is about paralyzing public servants — making them apprehensive about what they say, how it might be interpreted, and who might report them. It is about deterring anyone who might speak truth to power.”

That Secretary of State Marco Rubio has knuckled under and allowed and defended this indiscriminate purge, depriving the Department of immense talent, marks him as perhaps the worst Secretary of State in living memory

• Keith Peterson, of Lake Barrington, served 29 years as a press and cultural officer for the United States Information Agency and Department of State. He was chief editorial writer of the Daily Herald 1984-86. His book “American Dreams: The Story of the Cyprus Fulbright Commission” is available from Amazon.com.