But the damage done to the nation’s close-knit corps of career diplomats is deep. It reaches far beyond the individuals who provided two weeks of inspiring and principled testimony during the House Intelligence Committee’s impeachment inquiry into President Trump.
“This is the most fraught time and the most difficult time for our members” since State’s workforce was targeted during the McCarthy anti-communist turmoil of the early 1950s, Eric Rubin, president of the American Foreign Service Association, the union representing Foreign Service officers, told me earlier month.
Fraught, because diplomats have been caught between a Trump administration that did not want them to testify and House subpoenas that compelled their testimony. It’s also a difficult time for envoys, who vigorously protect their nonpartisan status only to get snared by Trump’s “domestic political errand,” as former National Security Council Russia adviser Fiona Hill described the president’s Ukraine machinations.
During his testimony last week, David Hale, the undersecretary of state for political affairs, said employees would not be penalized financially or professionally for their testimony. Their comments under oath noted Trump’s effort to secure information from a foreign government on a political opponent, former vice president Joe Biden, in exchange for U.S. military assistance to Ukraine.
Despite their incriminating testimony, the staffers don’t have to worry about retaliation, according to a Nov. 18 letter from Undersecretary of State for Management Brian Bulatao, to Sen. Robert Menendez (N.J.), the top Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee. “No employee has faced any adverse action by the Department for testimony before Congress on this matter,” the letter said. “The Department will not discipline any Department employee for appearing before Congress in response to a subpoena.”
Bulatao’s letter said that in addition to financial aid being provided to State employees for legal work, the employees were on regular pay with approved travel orders during their congressional appearances so they did not “expend personal leave or incur travel-related expenses.”
The financial legal assistance is limited, as is the healing these measures bring.
“Serving officers are being attacked for following their oath of office and testifying when legally ordered to do so,” Ronald E. Neumann, a former ambassador and president of the American Academy of Diplomacy, said by email. “The level of personal abuse is unmatched in my experience. This is deeply unsettling.” He counts the measures in Bulatao’s letter as “actions of support, albeit rather quiet. Yet while the attacks continue, permanent healing is unlikely.”
The letter is “rather quiet” compared with the pernicious, but successful, campaign of intimidation against Marie Yovanovitch before her recall from the ambassador’s post in Kyiv, apparently to further Trump’s Ukraine ploy. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s silence in her defense created a festering wound among Foreign Service officers.
“This is existential,” said Charles A. Ray, former ambassador to Cambodia and Zimbabwe, “because it really hits at the ability of the Foreign Service, the civil service and other permanent employees of the State Department to do their jobs effectively and to abide by the oath of office they took without facing potential career damage.”
Damage from State Department politicization goes beyond the Ukraine scandal.
Twice in recent months, the department’s inspector general issued reports about penalized employees whose political loyalty to Trump — not their allegiance to America — was questioned.
An August report about State’s Bureau of International Organization Affairs found “disrespectful and hostile treatment of employees, accusations against and harassment of career employees premised on claims that they were ‘disloyal’ based on their perceived political views.” The department accepted the report’s recommendation to develop a “corrective action plan to address the leadership and management deficiencies.”
A November report said a career employee’s assignment was terminated after discussions about her “perceived political views, association with former administrations, and perceived national origin.” State rejected that finding, saying the report “ignores compelling evidence” that the reassignment was made for professional reasons.
Bulatao’s letter to Menendez was in response to one from Foreign Relations Committee Democrats that accused Pompeo of “dereliction of duty in protecting Department personnel” from attacks.
State’s vow to help with legal fees and not retaliate against employees begins the healing process, “but following through with that commitment is what will matter most to career employees,” said an email from Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), a Foreign Relations Committee member.
“As with everything in this Administration, we need to conduct oversight to make sure they stick to their promises,” Kaine wrote. “To help heal the Department, Secretary Pompeo should start standing up for career staff, recuse himself from matters related to the Ukraine investigation, push back against the nomination of grossly unqualified political appointees, and advocate policies that support State Department personnel around the globe.”
State did not respond to a request for comment.
As tough as the current situation is for State Department staffers, if there is a silver lining, it “was an opportunity for Americans to see the caliber of our Foreign Service,” Rubin, American Foreign Service Association president, said Monday. But he added, “People would have much preferred not to have it happen.”
Read more: