Under the pretense of enhancing government efficiency, the Trump Administration has orchestrated a deliberate decline in the national security framework of the United States in merely two months. Concerns over this alarming trend intensified recently as President Donald Trump’s primary backer and Director of Government Efficiency (DOGE) Elon Musk was set to receive a briefing on sensitive plans regarding potential conflict with China.
At the Yale CEO Caucus meeting in March, a poll of 100 prominent U.S. CEOs revealed that 76% feel the nation is nearing a critical point requiring collective action against Trump’s encroachment on national security, with 80% expressing embarrassment over threats directed at our longstanding democratic allies and actions taken to appease authoritarian regimes.
Currently, the Department of Defense employs approximately 765,000 civilian workers and 1.3 million active-duty personnel, totaling around 2 million. In 1990, these numbers were 1 million and 2.1 million, equating to a total of 3 million. Although the Cold War was diminishing during the late 80s and early 90s, this reduction is not justifiable amid rising threats and the complexities of today’s defense requirements. Notably, the defense budget in 1990 constituted 5.6% of GDP; it now stands at only 3.5% of GDP, despite a significant surge in global conflict risks, now the highest in 80 years, possibly exceeding that seen during the Cold War.
Cutbacks initiated by DOGE have led to the departure—both voluntary and coerced—of experienced professionals in agencies where human capital is essential. Reduced capabilities in cyber offensive and defensive operations provide adversaries with undue advantage and expose the United States to novel threats. Key sources of soft power and influence have been relinquished, creating openings for exploitative regimes in the Middle East, Africa, Latin America, and other strategic regions. The growing politicization of historically nonpartisan institutions has bred public distrust toward government and military operations, resulting in detrimental impacts on organizational effectiveness and employee productivity.
The erosion of America’s diplomatic, defensive, and developmental resources coincides with escalating threats abroad. Recently, China carried out live-fire naval exercises off the coasts of Australia and Vietnam, alongside provocative military drills near Taiwan. Less than two weeks ago, Russian, Chinese, and Iranian forces engaged in their annual joint naval exercises in the Gulf of Oman. Weekly reports regarding cyber-attacks from Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran against U.S. and European networks continue to emerge. Additionally, China and Russia have accelerated their charm initiatives, highlighted by the opening of a $1.3 billion mega-port in Peru and progressing economic collaborations in the UAE and Saudi Arabia, along with military support for African leaders.
In spite of the actions taken by foreign rivals and Trump’s declarations of “peace through strength,” DOGE’s aggressive cutbacks have already resulted in a depletion of critical institutional knowledge and expertise that cannot easily be recuperated. While the Departments of State and Defense are large and bureaucratic, they also manage the most sophisticated networks of diplomacy and defense globally. This intricate system has arguably delivered the most peaceful and prosperous era in recorded history.
Opportunities to enhance operations and reduce expenses are always present in large organizations, both public and private, and should be actively pursued. However, the indiscriminate nature of layoffs across agencies—ranging from the Defense and State Departments to the FBI, CIA, and USAID—fails to align with Musk’s esteemed intellect. Preliminary estimates based on publicly available data indicate that around 40,000 individuals dedicated to safeguarding the nation from adversarial threats have been displaced from their vital roles. Below is a concise overview:
Approximately 21,000 personnel at the Department of Defense have taken voluntary resignation offers Almost all of USAID’s 14,000 employees have been either laid off or placed on leave The Trump Administration is currently reviewing 3,600 FBI employees, including those tied to the January 6 investigation and members of the counterterrorism division, for possible termination The majority of Voice of America’s staff, around 1,300 employees, have been placed on leave About 700 personnel from the State Department, including 450 career diplomats, have submitted resignation papers Approximately 400 positions at the Department of Homeland Security, with 130 stemming from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), have been eliminated At least 80 employees of the CIA have been dismissedAdditional layoffs are anticipated. While it may seem easy to become desensitized to such massive personnel reductions, these figures represent highly qualified, non-partisan experts specializing in surveillance, defense technology, foreign languages, diverse cultures, influence pathways, and invaluable relationships forged over significant tenures in their respective agencies. Moreover, the loss of such invaluable knowledge merely to achieve a maximum of $4.2 billion in salary savings (estimated by multiplying the 40,000 national security jobs slashed by the average federal employee salary of $106,382) pales in comparison to the $7 trillion national budget.
The Pentagon’s decision to terminate the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General C.Q. Brown; Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Lisa Franchetti; Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force, General Jim Slife; and top legal advisors for the Army, Navy, and Air Force preemptively dismisses highly esteemed and accomplished military leaders, stalling the realization of their strategic objectives, diminishing morale throughout the ranks, and injecting yet more uncertainty into defense frameworks as we transition through a pivotal presidential change.
The unsettling implications of Trump appointing presumably more submissive military personnel to replace these leaders were evident during his announcement regarding the next generation of U.S. Air Force fighter jets, which he oddly claimed to be named the “F-47” in honor of his future presidency. In the press briefing, Trump even asserted, “The generals selected a title, and it’s a beautiful number.” If accurate, this indicates an alarming trend of political influence over U.S. military leadership—concerning after Trump’s politicized removal of the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley’s security detail last January.
The dismissal of nine prominent FBI leaders, including the heads of significant field offices in Washington and New York, diminishes the credibility of the organization and introduces uncertainty within it. The broader termination of FBI and CIA personnel contributes to resource limitations across these elite agencies that have already faced staffing and expertise shortages for many years.
The exit of 18 Inspectors General—who have continually proved their worth by safeguarding the federal government from fraud, waste, and abuse across the FBI, Navy, Air Force, and Small Business Administration, among others—leaves governmental bodies exposed to new vulnerabilities from both foreign and domestic interference.
Beyond headcount reductions, Trump and his administration’s decisions to suspend U.S. Cyber Command’s offensive cyber and information operations against Russia and to halt coordinated efforts with European allies to combat Russian espionage are part of the President’s perplexing unilateral proposals to President Vladimir Putin, despite a notable rise in cyber assaults targeting the U.S. government.
The downsizing of CISA undermines our capability to counter cyber threats not just from Russia, but China, Iran, and North Korea as well. Additionally, the dissolution of the Cyber Safety Review Board hampers any initiatives to tackle espionage incursions from China’s Salt Typhoon, which compromised the systems of eight major telecommunications enterprises last year. Similarly, Trump has sidelined the crucial Office of Net Assessment, where military strategists devise future conflict scenarios. The actual cost taxpayers incur for this office’s operation is less than two of the 500 trips to Mar-A-Lago Trump billed the government for during his first term.
The collective shutdown of USAID, Voice of America, and various diplomatic missions will significantly undermine U.S. soft power, amplifying the adverse effects of Trump’s “America First” foreign policy approach while countries like China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea amplify their initiatives to erode U.S. influence and bolster their own.
The politicization of the allegedly “woke” military, FBI, CIA, NSA, and other security entities has tarnished the reputation of these traditionally neutral organizations, further diminishing public trust and national pride in them and their leaders. This will complicate recruitment efforts, lead to increased attrition rates, and result in decreased operational continuity. As articulated by five former Defense Secretaries in their recent letter to Congress, “The United States cannot afford to have our military infected by partisan politics and distracted from its core mission of defending the nation.”
The Trump Administration has markedly weakened America’s national security framework under the guise of government efficiency, reducing personnel across the Departments of Defense and State, the FBI, CIA, USAID, and various other agencies, all while global threats surge. The exodus of senior expertise poses a dire risk to our defense capabilities and soft power, permitting adversarial regimes to augment their influence.
For those of us who devoted our lives to serving the U.S. military and others engaged in national security efforts, these developments are profoundly concerning.
Bengali (Bangladesh) · 
English (United States) ·