ith both a sense of humor and a warning about the future of American diplomacy, former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch addressed students and diplomats at Georgetown University on February 12, 2020. She warned of a key problem in the practice of U.S. foreign policy under the current Administration: a lack of strategy from the top and an unwillingness to listen to senior career officials. These career officials are the institutional memory of the organization and best understand the practice of American diplomacy on both the policy and implementation levels. Political appointees must listen to them and end the disturbing trend of identifying supposedly disloyal federal government officials for retribution and firing.
In Georgetown’s Gaston Hall, Yovanovitch gave a lecture entitled “Diplomacy Today,” before receiving the Trainor Award for Excellence in the Conduct of Diplomacy. Numerous former colleagues sang Yovanovitch’s praises, not least for her conduct as a young officer in 1990s Moscow, when she and a colleague braved sniper fire in the streets to report on developments during the attempted coup against Boris Yeltsin.
While her tone was noticeably lighter than at her latest public appearance—in front of the House Intelligence Committee—she once again condemned the conspiracy theories touted by Republican lawmakers around her work in Ukraine in an attempt to discredit her. Using her own experience as ambassador in Ukraine, Yovanovitch warned that, without the full backing of Washington, diplomats will not be able to serve as credible representatives enacting U.S. policy.
Now retired from the State Department, she criticized senior political appointees, claiming they lack leadership skills and any strategic vision. This has led to a “keep ‘em guessing” foreign policy, which is weakening the country’s main advantage over its strategic competitors: the strength of its alliances and partnerships around the world. Senior officials “lack moral clarity” and are unable to articulate America’s story and values clearly overseas. Moreover, with many posts unfilled at the Department, it is difficult to pursue a coherent and consistent foreign policy and maintain the trust of international allies.
The State Department must do a better job of explaining to the public the ways in which diplomats and civil servants contribute to national security. Such an effort is vital to ensure the public is able to defend future cases of abuse towards officials like Yovanovitch. For many Americans, recent testimony by career officials such as Yovanovitch, was the first time they had heard public servants speak publicly about their work on U.S. national security and foreign policy. Yovanovitch addressed this in her lecture, arguing that the State Department’s work begins at home, and for the “need to be doing a better job of explaining our job. In a democracy, we serve the [American] people [...] We champion civil society abroad; we should do more of it at home.”
Inside the Department, senior officials—from the Secretary of State and his deputy downwards—need to provide vocal support for career officials. Moreover, if political appointees do not listen to career Foreign Service officers with their years of experience and institutional knowledge, the national security process quickly breaks down. This is not simply a matter of principal or supportive leadership from the top. It is essential for diplomats to conduct foreign policy effectively abroad. The dismissal of Lt. Colonel Vindman from his post at the White House, and the accompanying act of retribution against his brother, indicate the disregard for expertise in favor of blind loyalty under this administration. More broadly, it is difficult to view National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien’s downsizing of the NSC as anything other than a manifestation of Yovanovitch’s warnings.
Ultimately, this was an event to celebrate Ambassador Yovanovitch’s career and her contributions to American diplomacy. She clearly felt liberated from the burden of the past few months and the repeated attempts by the President and his associates to undermine her. But her insider view of the State Department under this Administration reminded the audience just how significant the damage to American diplomacy has been.
We will likely hear more from Ambassador Yovanovitch in the coming months, but for now, her Trainor Award lecture gives us a picture of a career diplomat who has countered the attacks against her with purpose, humor and grace, but who is rightly incredibly concerned about the future of American diplomacy. Without the institutional expertise of officials like Yovanovitch, and the scores of others whose names we will never know, it will not be possible to have a foreign policy that does more than “keep ‘em guessing.”
a global affairs media network
Our Institutions Need A Reboot, Not the Boot
March 31, 2020
W
ith both a sense of humor and a warning about the future of American diplomacy, former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch addressed students and diplomats at Georgetown University on February 12, 2020. She warned of a key problem in the practice of U.S. foreign policy under the current Administration: a lack of strategy from the top and an unwillingness to listen to senior career officials. These career officials are the institutional memory of the organization and best understand the practice of American diplomacy on both the policy and implementation levels. Political appointees must listen to them and end the disturbing trend of identifying supposedly disloyal federal government officials for retribution and firing.
In Georgetown’s Gaston Hall, Yovanovitch gave a lecture entitled “Diplomacy Today,” before receiving the Trainor Award for Excellence in the Conduct of Diplomacy. Numerous former colleagues sang Yovanovitch’s praises, not least for her conduct as a young officer in 1990s Moscow, when she and a colleague braved sniper fire in the streets to report on developments during the attempted coup against Boris Yeltsin.
While her tone was noticeably lighter than at her latest public appearance—in front of the House Intelligence Committee—she once again condemned the conspiracy theories touted by Republican lawmakers around her work in Ukraine in an attempt to discredit her. Using her own experience as ambassador in Ukraine, Yovanovitch warned that, without the full backing of Washington, diplomats will not be able to serve as credible representatives enacting U.S. policy.
Now retired from the State Department, she criticized senior political appointees, claiming they lack leadership skills and any strategic vision. This has led to a “keep ‘em guessing” foreign policy, which is weakening the country’s main advantage over its strategic competitors: the strength of its alliances and partnerships around the world. Senior officials “lack moral clarity” and are unable to articulate America’s story and values clearly overseas. Moreover, with many posts unfilled at the Department, it is difficult to pursue a coherent and consistent foreign policy and maintain the trust of international allies.
The State Department must do a better job of explaining to the public the ways in which diplomats and civil servants contribute to national security. Such an effort is vital to ensure the public is able to defend future cases of abuse towards officials like Yovanovitch. For many Americans, recent testimony by career officials such as Yovanovitch, was the first time they had heard public servants speak publicly about their work on U.S. national security and foreign policy. Yovanovitch addressed this in her lecture, arguing that the State Department’s work begins at home, and for the “need to be doing a better job of explaining our job. In a democracy, we serve the [American] people [...] We champion civil society abroad; we should do more of it at home.”
Inside the Department, senior officials—from the Secretary of State and his deputy downwards—need to provide vocal support for career officials. Moreover, if political appointees do not listen to career Foreign Service officers with their years of experience and institutional knowledge, the national security process quickly breaks down. This is not simply a matter of principal or supportive leadership from the top. It is essential for diplomats to conduct foreign policy effectively abroad. The dismissal of Lt. Colonel Vindman from his post at the White House, and the accompanying act of retribution against his brother, indicate the disregard for expertise in favor of blind loyalty under this administration. More broadly, it is difficult to view National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien’s downsizing of the NSC as anything other than a manifestation of Yovanovitch’s warnings.
Ultimately, this was an event to celebrate Ambassador Yovanovitch’s career and her contributions to American diplomacy. She clearly felt liberated from the burden of the past few months and the repeated attempts by the President and his associates to undermine her. But her insider view of the State Department under this Administration reminded the audience just how significant the damage to American diplomacy has been.
We will likely hear more from Ambassador Yovanovitch in the coming months, but for now, her Trainor Award lecture gives us a picture of a career diplomat who has countered the attacks against her with purpose, humor and grace, but who is rightly incredibly concerned about the future of American diplomacy. Without the institutional expertise of officials like Yovanovitch, and the scores of others whose names we will never know, it will not be possible to have a foreign policy that does more than “keep ‘em guessing.”
