Like many Americans, I was surprised in November 2016,
when, despite losing the popular vote by 3 million ballots, the quirky
Electoral College system elected Donald Trump president, and again when he
announced the nomination of Rex Tillerson as his secretary of state. I was,
however, prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt, conditioned as I am
after 50 years of government service, to accept the outcome of elections, even
when, because of the Electoral College, that will is not that of a majority of
those who voted, and if recent polls are to be believed, a majority of those
who didn’t.
As we approach the first anniversary of the Trump
Administration, though, I’m left with a lot of doubt, and very little benefit,
particularly when it comes to the dismal state of the country’s foreign
affairs.
With the president engaging in name calling and
bellicosity with North Korea’s mercurial leader pushing the world as close to
nuclear war as it was during the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, undercutting his
secretary of state by publicly calling his statements on the need for diplomacy
to solve the Korean crisis ‘a waste of time,’ and alienating many of our key
allies through his actions and tweets, I’ve watched the United States’ global
position gradually eroded over the past eleven months more than after our 1973
withdrawal from Vietnam. Secretary of defense James ‘Mad Dog’ Mattis, in
summarizing Trump’s plans to reduce the Department of State to a hollow shell,
said “If you don’t fund the State Department fully, then I need to buy more
ammunition.” Trump seems determined to do both. In February 2017, the White
House draft budget proposed a State Department cut of 31%, but a $54 billion
increase in defense spending. The defense increase was only partly offset by
cuts to all civilian agencies and programs, which is bad enough, but the idea
that we can increase military presence globally, while at the same time,
decreasing or eliminating the diplomats and aid officials that work alongside
the military in some of the world’s toughest spots, is not pennywise and pound
foolish, it’s just plain foolish.
Tillerson, despite his success as CEO of Exxon, has
not done much better at the State Department. His aloofness, failure or
inability to convince the president to curb his tendency to ‘tweet before
thinking,’ and failure to fill key senior positions across the entire
department, have resulted in alienation and frustration at Foggy Bottom. Senior
and experienced Foreign Service Officers have been leaving in large numbers,
and little has been done to fill the experience void their departure creates.
When Tillerson travels abroad, rather than working with our ambassadors (many
of whom are charge d’affaires, because ambassadors have not been nominated), he
has with him in meetings, sitting where the ambassador would normally sit, an
aide who lacks foreign policy experience.
Failure to appoint senior leaders in the State
Department, such as the assistant secretary of state for African Affairs, for
example, and leaving many of the bureaus under the leadership of individuals in
an ‘acting’ capacity, has an immediate impact. Certain actions, such as the
decision to evacuate an embassy, cannot be decided by an official ‘acting’ for
the principal, which could result in a delay in making critical decisions. In
addition, when coupled with the departure of so many senior career officials,
people are placed in positions without having access to the advice and counsel
of more experienced people. There are also long-term effects that neither
Tillerson nor the president seem of aware of, or, heaven forbid, care about it.
Eliminating so many senior people means that those in the junior ranks must
work their way through the system without benefit of the experienced guidance
those of my generation in the diplomatic service found so valuable in our
careers. They, in turn, though forced to take on more senior responsibilities,
lack the experience to effectively help those below them. After four years,
this becomes a problem that will exist for a long time into the future, long
after the end of this administration.
What we’re witnessing is the systematic destruction of
our ability to exercise sober global leadership, and the erosion of our global reputation.
For the average American, there is also a price to
pay. Hollowing out the Foreign Service will eventually reduce our ability to
serve the interests of Americans who travel, work, or live abroad, and will
reduce the level of service we provide to American business abroad. This is not
good for our national security.
None of these problems will be solved by buying more
ammunition.
No comments:
Post a Comment