Posted on 02/21/2006 11:05:42 AM PST by prairiebreeze
A State Department reorganization of analysts involved in preventing the spread of deadly weapons has spawned internal turmoil, with more than half a dozen career employees alleging in interviews that political appointees sought to punish long-term employees whose views they considered suspect.
Senior State Department officials deny that and say an investigation has found that the proper personnel practices were followed. But three officials involved in the reorganization, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly, acknowledge that a merger of two bureaus reduced the influence of employees who were viewed by some political appointees as disloyal to the administration's policies.
"There are a number of disgruntled employees who feel they have been shoved aside for political purposes. That's true," said one of these officials. "But there was rank insubordination on the part of these officers."
About a dozen top experts on nonproliferation have left the department in recent months, with many citing the reorganization as a reason.
The dispute has thrown a spotlight on the tensions that often exist between longtime career employees and the political appointees who come and go with successive administrations. It is also being closely watched within the State Department as another sign that, under Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's leadership, the department will no longer be at war with the rest of the administration.
Rice and her top aides have sought to heal the damaging rifts that existed with the Pentagon and other agencies. Some State Department officials privately acknowledge that they used to be thrilled by the department's reputation as a renegade in President Bush's first term, but they say the message has become clear in the past year that such attitudes are no longer acceptable.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Some State Department officials privately acknowledge that they used to be thrilled by the department's reputation as a renegade in President Bush's first term, but they say the message has become clear in the past year that such attitudes are no longer acceptable
Go get 'em Secretary Rice. YeeHaaaw!!
Whaaa! How you dare you fire our sources! Whaaa!
Oh yeah. Oh, yeaaaah!!
Ping
"Condi for King"
To be hired back when Hillary comes to town and unleashes her cankles.
housecleaning ping
Excellent news! Cleaning house in a place where it's definitely needed. But the whiners will be leaking like crazy in the next few months. Not that they haven't been doing that all along.
Hell hath no fury like a career liberal Dem bureaucrat who is being shuffled out of a position of power.
Long overdue and VERY welcome. I hope very through as well. CONDI FOR PRESIDENT!
Ok, we'll be looking for them to pop up as "experts" on the cable news shows. Or, as "anonymous sources" in AP and NYT's articles.
People in sensative area should be reassign or augmented out as security mandates.
I love a good news story. There are so few in the WashingtonCompost.
My only question would be "What took so long?" Go get 'em, Condi!
The Washington Post runs a report that shocks no one at all. The effort by Condoleezza Rice at the State Department to consolidate the bureaucracy and bring it into line with the policy of the elected government has created hard feelings among some of the rank and file careerists, who apparently liked their ability to ignore the chain of command and undermine appointees. Some of them have run to the Post and Glenn Kessler to complain about their treatment in the Rice regime:
A State Department reorganization of analysts involved in preventing the spread of deadly weapons has spawned internal turmoil, with more than half a dozen career employees alleging in interviews that political appointees sought to punish long-term employees whose views they considered suspect.
Senior State Department officials deny that and say an investigation has found that the proper personnel practices were followed. But three officials involved in the reorganization, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly, acknowledge that a merger of two bureaus reduced the influence of employees who were viewed by some political appointees as disloyal to the administration's policies.
"There are a number of disgruntled employees who feel they have been shoved aside for political purposes. That's true," said one of these officials. "But there was rank insubordination on the part of these officers."
How rank was that insubordination? Previous management encouraged the careerists to bypass key political appointees designated to ensuring that the elected government's policies were carried out, allowing State to thumb their nose at the White House. Since the Administration has the ultimate responsibility for the performance of State, this situation was untenable. Even Kessler reports that the insubordination was reality:
"The suspicion is we would undermine the policy," said one of the officials who have felt sidelined. "That is what all of us find most offensive. We are here to serve any administration." ...
The employees who say that they have been targeted once had a back channel to then-Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and his deputy, Richard L. Armitage, who they said would on occasion ask them to bypass their superior, John R. Bolton, now the ambassador to the United Nations. Bolton, with backing from allies in the Pentagon and the vice president's office, frequently battled the rest of the State Department on policy issues.
State has always had its cadre of careerists whose outlook is that they run American foreign policy and not the elected President. It's been an example of the Washington bureaucracy for ages, and the Bush administration decided that it has gone on long enough. The President has a right to expect that his foreign-policy initiatives get implemented once so directed at State, and that the legitimate check on that authority resides with Congress and the American electorate, not a few self-important unaccountable apparatchiks at Foggy Bottom.
If he has to live with the consequences of the performance at State, then Bush has decided to make sure that the insubordination comes to a screeching halt. Rice has followed that policy and implemented it more quickly and efficiently than anyone predicted. If that makes the insubordinates unhappy and demoralized, that doesn't bother me a bit, and it shouldn't bother anyone else, either.
Good. Follow this up by canning that imbecile Norm Mineta over at Transportation.
Too bad the previous Secretary of State didn't have the ba((s to do the job. He left it to Dr. Rice.
Use a high pressure water hose and clean out the stables! It's been too full of manure for way too long!.........
LOL! Yes, sweet irony.
Condi at State, Bolton at UN. Now if the CIA gets in the act we can clean up Washington.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.