The cast of PBS News Hour came together on Friday to decry the “shameful” nature of that day’s layoffs at the State Department. While New York Times columnist David Brooks and Washington Post associate editor Jonathan Capehart would claim the move would negatively impact U.S. foreign policy, their reasons for doing so were not convincing.
Host Amna Nawaz began with Brooks, “I do want to ask you both briefly as well about the mass firings at the State Department we reported on earlier. That follows a Supreme Court ruling that basically cleared the way for the Trump administration to move forward with those reductions in force. What's going to be the impact here, David?”
Whether he realized it or not, Brooks responded by advocating for a personal style of diplomacy that President Trump is often criticized for, “Yeah, I was once having lunch with a buddy of mine in the State Department. And he was a political appointee. And he said, ‘I thought this was about foreign affairs, but this institution is really about foreign relations.’”
Explaining himself, Brooks continued, “And what he meant by that, it's not about policy. It's about building relationships with people in other governments. And that really is — to get something done, it's not enough — you have to be able to call them on the phone. You have to have a history of trust. And so our diplomats out there have been doing this for decades. And they have built relationships with their counterparts around the world, with other people.”
Brooks concluded by doubting the administration’s rationale for the move, “And if you take away that relational element, anybody in any business understands this, you have taken away a lot. And so we have not seen a rapid increase in federal employees. It's been pretty stable for a long time. And so I doubt there's much waste and abuse in the State Department. But we're suffering with those loss of those relationships.”
There’s a reason why presidents of both parties have increasingly run foreign policy out of the White House and the National Security Council and relied on presidential advisors and special envoys. It is because the NSC is viewed as leaner and less bureaucratically lethargic than State. Meanwhile, the layoffs include 1,107 civil servants and 246 Foreign Service Officers. To put that in context, State had roughly 13,000 career civil servants and 14,000 FSOs.
Capehart, however, took things further, “It's shameful what happened today at the State Department. In addition to what David is saying, what we have lost today is decades, generations’ worth of relationships, expertise, knowledge, just the basis of American foreign policy.”
He added, “To David's point, a lot of the policies pursued by the United States wasn't just because Congress and the president worked and hammered out a deal or a treaty or whatever. It's the people on the ground. And we have lost that. We spent generations building it, decades building it, and gone in an afternoon.”
Reportedly, most of the layoffs fell on departments that dealt with things like migration and climate change, so the idea that the U.S. just lost lots of specialized expertise is not quite accurate, but more importantly, when was the last time the State Department had a major accomplishment? Even during Trump’s first term, the Abraham Accords was largely a product of the White House.
Sign the petition to help us defund PBS and NPR at defundpbsnpr.org.
Here is a transcript for the July 11 show:
PBS News Hour
7/11/2025
7:50 PM ET
AMNA NAWAZ: I do want to ask you both briefly as well about the mass firings at the State Department we reported on earlier. That follows a Supreme Court ruling that basically cleared the way for the Trump administration to move forward with those reductions in force. What's going to be the impact here, David?
DAVID BROOKS: Yeah, I was once having lunch with a buddy of mine in the State Department. And he was a political appointee. And he said, "I thought this was about foreign affairs, but this institution is really about foreign relations."
And what he meant by that, it's not about policy. It's about building relationships with people in other governments. And that really is — to get something done, it's not enough — you have to be able to call them on the phone. You have to have a history of trust. And so our diplomats out there have been doing this for decades. And they have built relationships with their counterparts around the world, with other people.
And if you take away that relational element, anybody in any business understands this, you have taken away a lot. And so we have not seen a rapid increase in federal employees. It's been pretty stable for a long time. And so I doubt there's much waste and abuse in the State Department. But we're suffering with those loss of those relationships.
JONATHAN CAPHEHART: It's shameful what happened today at the State Department.
In addition to what David is saying, what we have lost today is decades, generations’ worth of relationships, expertise, knowledge, just the basis of American foreign policy.
To David's point, a lot of the policies pursued by the United States wasn't just because Congress and the president worked and hammered out a deal or a treaty or whatever. It's the people on the ground. And we have lost that. We spent generations building it, decades building it, and gone in an afternoon.
