The Changing Landscape of U.S. Diplomacy: A Shift in Ambassadorial Appointments
The traditional balance of career diplomats to political appointees for U.S. ambassadors is undergoing a significant shift. Historically, two-thirds of ambassadors were career foreign service officers. However, under the Trump administration, there has been a notable increase in politically appointed ambassadors, leaving experienced diplomats with limited advancement prospects.
The State Department is experiencing a wave of retirements, likened to military personnel transitions, where diplomats must be promoted to remain in service. This system is now proving challenging for many seasoned Foreign Service officers, as reported by NPR’s Michele Kelemen.
Kelly Adams-Smith, who served as an American diplomat for 28 years, is among those who recently retired, despite a desire to continue serving. She was set to become the ambassador to Moldova, a nomination that stalled in the Senate during the Biden administration. Upon Trump’s return to office, Adams-Smith received a generic email stating, “Dear colleague, you are no longer considered to be a nominee, and that I needed to find another position within the Department of State.”
Adams-Smith expressed frustration, noting the extensive training she received, which included proficiency in several languages. She remarked, “It was our job to give the American taxpayer a return on that investment. And we have not been able to do that now.”
The State Department attributes the rise in retirements to the dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development, suggesting that career ambassadors are encouraged to seek new roles. However, George Kent, a former ambassador to Estonia, noted a deliberate effort by the Trump administration to make senior officers feel unwelcome, leading to a spike in retirements. Kent stated, “What this shows is that under the second Trump administration, there’s a concerted effort to make senior Foreign Service officers feel unwelcome, not give them onward assignments and to try to create the conditions in which they retire, leave willingly, so that they are no longer within the system.”
Traditionally, around 70% of U.S. ambassadors were career diplomats, but the current administration has appointed more than 90% of its ambassadors from political circles. This shift is contributing to a reduction in the Foreign Service’s size.
George Kent highlighted the impact, saying, “We’ve lost 20, 25% of our Foreign Service officers over the last 16 months, and my guess is that will take a decade to recover, just on the personnel side, not to mention institutional integrity.”
Daniel Rosenblum, who retired as ambassador to Kazakhstan, shares these concerns, pondering the long-term effects. “The real thing that haunts many of us as we’re looking at it is – how bad will the damage be, and how long will it take to recover?”
Social media discussions have echoed these sentiments, especially with the recent retirement of Julie Davis, the acting ambassador to Ukraine. Last year, the State Department also recalled about 30 career ambassadors from their international posts.
Rosenblum observed, “Very few, if any of them, have found opportunities, and most of them are heading towards retirement.”
More than 80 U.S. embassies are currently without ambassadors, including the post in Moldova. Adams-Smith expressed concern over this gap in diplomatic representation, stating, “We have more than 80 embassies without an ambassador right now. We are disarming. We’re unilaterally disarming. Russia or China would never do that.”
Despite these challenges, Adams-Smith continues to inspire future diplomats through her teaching role at American University, encouraging young people to consider careers in the Foreign Service.
