Tillerson takes helm with staff in tense state

Former CEO of Exxon faces dissent among diplomatic corps

WASHINGTON — Newly confirmed Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s most urgent task at the State Department isn’t necessarily to manage the threat from Iran and North Korea, to recast relations with Russia and China, or to calm nervous allies in Europe and the Far East.

It will be to quell what some describe as a nearmutiny among the State Department’s vast staff and to counter a growing sense of demoralization by the nation’s diplomats.

In a largely partisan vote, the former Exxon Mobil chief executive won his Senate approval Wednesday by 56 to 43. Only three Democrats and an independent — Sens. Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, Joe Manchin of West Virginia, Mark Warner of Virginia and Sen. Angus King, I-Maine — crossed party lines to join Senate Republicans, a sign of how divisive Tillerson’s nomination has been.

Tillerson, 64, takes over a normally staid department that has been singularly roiled by President Donald Trump’s efforts to shake up the U.S. foreign policy and national security establishment in pursuit of what Trump has called an “America First” policy.

Trump’s critics describe confusion and concern at State as career diplomats and civil servants struggle with what they see as baffling overtures to Russia and seeming snubs of NATO allies; dissing of Mexico; and an executive order temporarily barring entry to visitors and immigrants from seven Muslimmajority countries.

“It has been head-spinning,” said the U.S. ambassador to one of the nations caught up in the Trump tumult. The envoy did not want to be identified publicly given the uncertain transition.

Most of State’s top political appointees have departed, as often happens when a new administration arrives. But so many Republican foreign policy veterans criticized Trump during the campaign, and now are effectively barred from joining his administration, that dozens of senior positions may remain empty for months.

Choosing them may put the former Texas oil man at odds with the White House, which already has shown it is more than willing to write sweeping executive orders without getting any buy-in from the departments that must implement them.

Like Trump, Tillerson has no government or military experience. During a rocky Senate confirmation hearing last month, he faced sharp questions from Democrats about his personal friendship with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“There’s a new level of consternation,” said Anthony Blinken, who was deputy secretary of state under Barack Obama. He commented after the chaotic start of Trump’s travel suspension Friday, which saw hundreds of people with valid U.S. visas and green cards suddenly detained at U.S. airports or stranded around the globe.

The State Department was not consulted before the order was issued, sources said, even though it is responsible for issuing visas and vetting refugees.

The concerns boiled over Tuesday when more than 800 U.S. diplomats, consular officers and other Foreign Service employees formally submitted a signed cable of dissent to Trump’s order to temporarily suspend all travel from seven Muslim-majority countries in an effort to prevent terrorism.

The dissent channel is a rarely-used but time-honored system that allows State Department officials to offer opinions on foreign policy that diverge from the White House. The dissents are usually confidential, but this one — the largest ever — was circulated to U.S. embassies and consulates around the world.

“A policy which closes our doors to over 200 million legitimate travelers in the hopes of preventing a small number of travelers who intend to harm Americans ... will not achieve its aim of making our country safer,” it states.

“Such a policy runs counter to core American values of nondiscrimination, fair play and extending a warm welcome to foreign visitors and immigrants.”

When reports of the diplomats’ mass dissent first emerged, Trump’s team reacted sharply. White House spokesman Sean Spicer said Monday that “career bureaucrats” should “either get with the program or they can go.”

Trump’s critics viewed that as a veiled threat.

Department veterans also decried what they described as a “no need to know” approach by Trump’s aides, who they said had declined briefings by outgoing diplomats and had ignored policy papers prepared for the transition team.