US State Department Spokesperson Tammy Bruce at a press conference in Washington on April 22, 2025.
Washington: The United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s State Department overhaul, unveiled yesterday, aims to make diplomacy ‘great again’ with a DOGE-inspired efficiency push, stirring global unease. The reform prompted questions from journalists and concerns from global stakeholders, particularly in the Middle East and Africa, about its execution and impact, signalling a shift in U.S. foreign policy.
Unveiled amid global tensions, the State Department’s reorganisation plan integrates the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) into regional bureaus, eliminates redundant offices, and reorients issues like war crimes prevention, aiming for agile diplomacy. It aligns with President Donald Trump’s efficiency agenda, with Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) inspiration cited in efforts to reduce bureaucratic inefficiencies.
Rubio’s Reform Faces DOGE Doubt
As of April 23, 2025, the reform’s relevance is heightened by global challenges requiring swift U.S. responses. The efficiency push aligns with public demand, but Elon Musk’s influence raises autonomy concerns, and the lack of embassy closure details fuels scepticism among stakeholders.
Journalists raised concerns about external influence, particularly Elon Musk’s potential role through DOGE’s efficiency push, during a media briefing by Department Spokesperson Tammy Bruce, highlighting fears of outside sway over diplomatic priorities. Although Musk was not named, a journalist’s question about DOGE’s role prompted Bruce to clarify its limited involvement. “DOGE is not in charge of this, but this is the result of what we’ve learned and the fact that we appreciate the results, and we want more of those results,” she said, noting the reform reflects a broader efficiency effort. “This is the State Department’s version of [DOGE’s mission]… a whole-of-government [effort] looking at how they can make their department more efficient, less burdensome, less bureaucratic,” Bruce added, addressing anxieties that DOGE might override diplomatic expertise while affirming the department’s leadership by secretaries.
Implied global stakeholders, especially in the Middle East and Africa, expressed apprehension about the reform’s practical implications, fearing disruptions to U.S. diplomatic presence in regions reliant on embassies and consulates. A journalist asked Bruce, “A lot of people around the world will be wondering what – especially perhaps in the Middle East, Africa – what it will actually mean for them on the ground, what – how will these changes take effect? Will we see offices over there that are being closed, the consulates and so on? Can you talk a little bit about what people around the world can actually expect?” Bruce clarified that the reorganisation focuses on Washington’s internal structure. “This is an organisational roadmap for this department here, right, in Washington, D.C. The arguments about what will occur in other countries when you’re talking about embassies and consulates, that’s not addressed here,” she said, suggesting benefits from a “more direct person-to-person framework, as opposed to bureaucracy-to-bureaucracy” and a “more nimble effort” with faster decision-making, like resolving grants without “17 messages.” Her lack of specifics on embassy operations left uncertainties about stability in regions where U.S. support is critical.
Efficiency Plan Stirs State Department Fears
Rubio’s press statement detailed the department’s inefficiencies, calling it “bloated, bureaucratic, and unable to perform its essential diplomatic mission” after 15 years of growth and rising costs that yielded “less effective and less efficient diplomacy.” He criticised its focus on “radical political ideology” over national interests, stating, “We are facing tremendous challenges across the globe. To deliver on President Trump’s America First foreign policy, we must make the State Department great again.” The plan consolidates region-specific functions, eliminates redundant offices, and terminates non-statutory programs, reducing offices from 734 to an unspecified lower number, as shown in a pre-reform organizational chart dated July 1, 2025, which lists bureaus like African Affairs (AF) and the Office of Global Criminal Justice (J/GCJ), now being restructured. A new chart is at State.gov, though bureau reassignments remain fluid. “This approach will empower the department from the ground up, from the bureaus to the embassies,” Rubio said, envisioning a streamlined institution.
Bruce emphasised the reform’s aim to empower career diplomats, described as “experts, researchers, individuals who are committed to a certain region”, shaping policy. “The bottom line here is that these sweeping changes will empower our talented diplomats to put America and Americans first,” she said, addressing job loss fears. “This is a reorganisation plan. It is not something where people are being fired today… It’s a roadmap; it’s a plan.” Congressional notifications ensure oversight, and under secretaries, with 30 days to propose plans, may target a 15 per cent domestic staff reduction, though Bruce declined to confirm internal memo specifics, citing sensitivity. “These are under secretaries who are working daily with the people in this building… they are best suited to make a determination when it comes to this roadmap,” she said, emphasising their role.
The integration of USAID into regional bureaus restructures foreign aid management, embedding USAID’s operations—such as funding for development, health, or infrastructure—within the State Department’s six geographic bureaus, like those for Africa or the Near East, previously listed under the Under Secretary for Political Affairs (P) in the July 1, 2025, chart. USAID operated semi-independently, often bypassing embassy or host nation input, leading to misaligned projects. Bruce noted, “You would have donations or funding for a project that the country itself was not interested in or did not want and had other needs, that the embassy staff or the ambassador was never consulted,” citing cases where aid was “detrimental.” Now, USAID’s functions are assigned to relevant bureaus, ensuring diplomats, ambassadors, and local stakeholders collaborate on aid decisions. “Each regional bureau [will] have the element of the USAID that is relevant to that bureau so that they would be working together,” Bruce said. “Any aid that goes out is aid that we work with the nation on, that we work with the embassies on, and people on the ground with an interest who are stakeholders, will have a say in that,” she added, aiming to align aid with U.S. goals and local needs, though coordination challenges remain a concern.
The elimination of the Global Engagement Center (GEC), separate from the roadmap, saves $50 million annually and reflects opposition to domestic censorship. Bruce noted its resistance to prior closure: “That bureau, which had been ordered to be removed last fall—what they did is they changed its name and moved people around.” Its removal, she argued, benefits taxpayers. “By eliminating that bureau… that worked to censor the American public… the American people are better off for it,” she said, redirecting resources to diplomacy. On disinformation, like Russian or Chinese interference, Bruce acknowledged its importance but said the roadmap omits such details, raising questions about future counter-disinformation strategies.
Journalists questioned the elimination of the Office of Global Criminal Justice (J/GCJ) and the Under Secretary for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights (J), both listed in the July 1, 2025, chart, raising concerns about democracy promotion and war crimes prevention. Bruce reassured that these persist across bureaus. “Just because [a bureau] has been folded into a different bureau… doesn’t mean that it’s gone or we don’t care,” she said. “Certain issues deserve to be considered part—not like some specialised, separate, segregated interest. Why shouldn’t that interest be in every bureau?” On war crimes, she affirmed, “Those values that you know are American values remain,” but noted, “This is a roadmap… there may be certain things that change,” suggesting reassignments, like for J/GCJ, are evolving. On democracy funding, like media support in Hungary, Bruce emphasised stakeholder-driven aid. “American tax dollars… deserve to be used to reflect the values and the interests of the United States, which of course is democracy and freedom around the world,” she said, stressing transparency, though mainstreaming may risk diluting expertise.
The reform relies on career diplomats, whom Bruce praised as “experts, researchers, individuals who are committed to a certain region.” Their adaptability is key amid the roadmap’s ambiguity, which lacks detailed reassignments. Resources like a fact sheet, FAQs, Rubio’s Substack opinion piece at StateDEPT.Substack.com, and Deputy Secretary Christopher Landau’s statement aim to provide clarity, with undersecretaries tasked to finalise plans by July 1. The vision of reviving “the nature of human diplomacy, of getting things done” recalls an agile era, but its feasibility remains uncertain given the scale of changes.
Rubio underscored the reform’s alignment with Trump’s vision, stating, “Under President Trump’s leadership, we have a commander in chief committed to putting America and Americans first.” He added, “As his Secretary of State, I am confident a reformed State Department will meet the moment and help make our country great once again,” framing the reorganisation as a step toward national renewal.
In an interview with Bari Weiss of The Free Press’s Honestly with Bari Weiss Podcast, Rubio stressed today, “This is not a cost-cutting exercise, although it certainly will provide savings to the American taxpayer. This is a policy exercise, and here’s why. Foreign policy – mature foreign policy, realistic foreign policy – requires the balancing of both policy geopolitical considerations, which often involve pragmatism, and some level of idealism – the promotion, for example, of human rights or democracy and things of that nature. So this sort of balance.” Weiss pointed out many of the offices that are being cut “seem to broadly be about America’s soft power role in the world – things like the promotion of human rights, fighting extremism, promoting democracy abroad”. Weiss also noted that critics of the administration were already saying in reaction that “this is sort of yet another sign that the Trump Administration is pulling back from the world and leaving the vacuum to be filled by other contenders like China and Russia”. However, Rubio asserted that “we’re still going to be involved in those things, caring about human rights, but it’s going to be run at the embassy and regional level, not out of some office in Washington, D.C. that has that title”. He told the interviewer: “Promoting democracy and human rights in our relations, for example, with some country in the Middle East is probably going to look different than it would with some country in Central America or South America. That’s just a geopolitical reality. In geopolitical reality, we are going to have to have partnerships and alliances with countries whose system of government maybe is not be like ours, whose view on religious tolerance, for example, may not be like ours. And we may not like that, and it doesn’t mean we don’t wish it were different, but we still have to have relations with these countries because it serves a geopolitical purpose, it serves the national interest of the United States. The national interest of the United States in the Middle East is stability. The national interest of the United States in the Middle East is preventing groups that would attack us here in the homeland from taking root. The national interest of the United States in Central America is different. It’s migration,
Critically, rapid cuts could disrupt diplomacy, and Rubio’s “radical political ideology” claim, absent evidence, risks alienating diplomats and allies. USAID’s integration may strengthen influence, but it faces coordination risks. The reform’s success hinges on execution by July 1, with congressional oversight shaping its trajectory.
– global bihari bureau
