Some diplomats said they joined the dissent by sending an email saying “I’m in” or “Please add my name as a signer” along with their full name, title, position and post.

The letter was apparently circulated through informal networks of diplomats and not through any State Department-wide email list. One diplomat on vacation in the United States said he received the letter from a colleague in another part of the world who was not connected to the drafters and was simply passing it along.

The diplomat predicted that hundreds of other diplomats would be eager to sign it if they could, but because of the complications of figuring out where the dissent memo originally came from, he was not sure how many would actually sign it.

Most people in the State Department have never seen anything like this, the diplomat said. He said dissent memos were reserved for major policy issues, not for little grumbles like bad food in the embassy cafeteria.

That diplomat also requested anonymity, saying that Foreign Service officers were not supposed to criticize American policy publicly and that he did not want to open himself up to accusations that he had violated the rules. That could threaten his job, he said, especially in such a polarized environment.

This is exactly what the dissent channel, as it is called, was intended for.

Starting in 1971 during the Vietnam War, the channel encourages department officials to voice their criticisms internally through a process of sending a memo or a cable to the secretary of state expressing their concerns and suggesting solutions. The final part of the visa ban memo lays out detailed alternatives, including increased vetting for specific nationalities.

State Department rules are supposed to protect dissenters from being retaliated against, and last year several dozen diplomats signed a dissent memo criticizing American policy on Syria.</s>Just a few days after agencies scrambled to enforce President Donald Trump’s executive order that barred refugees and citizens from seven predominantly Muslim countries from coming to the United States, State Department employees are reportedly coming out against the travel ban en masse.

At least 200 State Department employees have signed onto internal memos harshly criticizing Trump’s order. According to Foreign Policy, there are a few different versions of the memo but all share a similar theme — that contrary to the White House’s assertion that the new rules are about protecting the United States, this ban “will increase anti-American sentiment” and “not achieve its stated aim of to [sic] protect the American people from terrorist attacks by foreign nations.” The memo added that the policy “runs counter to core American values of nondiscrimination, fair play and extending a warm welcome to foreign visitors and immigrants.” (A full draft of at least one of the reported memos is available here.)

Right now, this document is just floating around Foggy Bottom, but it will likely become a “dissent” cable, a formal process — begun during the Vietnam War — that State Department employees use to register opposition to a White House policy, which gets turned over to the secretary of State. This particular memo is a big deal for a few reasons, starting with the number of people who are registering their opposition. It’s also taken Trump less than two weeks to rile his cadre of diplomats — so early into his term that the secretary of State isn’t yet in place to receive the “dissent” cable once it’s filed. Rex Tillerson, likely to be confirmed by the Senate this week, will have to start his post with a restless agency, and figure out how to respond. (Last year, more than 50 State Department diplomats and bureaucrats caused a stir when they gave top diplomat John Kerry a “dissent” cable over former President Barack Obama’s Syria policies.)

The State Department confirmed that such a memo existed, and that it will “respect it,” according to the Washington Post. Acting secretary of State Thomas Shannon will probably end up receiving the cable. But it doesn’t appear, right now, that the dissent cable will do much to change the minds within Trumpworld — especially since world leaders, former high-ranking intelligence officials, and our allies on the front lines fighting ISIS don’t seem to be getting through to the administration. White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer, conceding that such a memo existed, told reporters those in disagreement needed to “either get with the program or they can go.”

“He’s been clear on it since taking office, that he’s going to put this safety of this country first. He is going to implement things that are in the best interest of the safety of this country prospectively, not re-actively,” Spicer continued. “And if somebody has a problem with that agenda then that does call into question whether or not they should continue in that post or not.”</s>WASHINGTON — The White House clashed Monday with a large group of American diplomats who are voicing dissent with Donald Trump’s temporary travel ban on citizens from seven Muslim majority countries, challenging them to resign if they aren’t on board.

“They should either get with the program or they can go,” Sean Spicer, Trump’s press secretary, said.

In startling language, Spicer dismissed the criticism from what he called “career bureaucrats.” While he later said Trump appreciates the work of public servants, Spicer said they should respect the desires of the American people and the importance Trump places on protecting the country.

“If somebody has a problem with that agenda, that does call into question whether they should continue in that post or not,” Spicer said.

“This is about the safety of America.”

The comments came after diplomats circulated a memo arguing that the executive order Trump signed last week will not make the U.S. safe, runs counter to American values and will fuel anti-American sentiment 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 from using the visa system to enter the United States will not achieve its aim of making our country safer,” the diplomats wrote in a so-called “dissent cable” being drafted for State Department leadership.

“This ban stands in opposition to the core American and constitutional values that we, as federal employees, took an oath to uphold,” a draft of the cable said.

U.S. officials said at least several hundred diplomats indicated they would sign the memo and that it was expected to be formally submitted later Monday. The final number of signatories will not be available until it is submitted, the officials said. The officials disclosed internal discussions on condition they not be quoted by name, in part because they feared retaliation.

Dissent channel cables are a mechanism for U.S. diplomats to register disagreement internally about U.S. policies. It was established during the Vietnam War and was most recently used by diplomats to criticize the Obama administration’s approach to Syria.

Spicer defended the executive order and said its impact had been “blown way out of proportion and exaggerated.”

The State Department’s official response was less confrontational.

“The Dissent Channel is a longstanding official vehicle for State Department employees to convey alternative views and perspectives on policy issues,” department spokesman Mark Toner said. “This is an important process that the acting secretary, and the department as a whole, value and respect. It allows State employees to express divergent policy views candidly and privately to senior leadership.”

A Republican senator is criticizing the Trump administration for failing to mention Jews in a statement remembering the Holocaust.

Sen. Susan Collins of Maine said over Twitter that “The Administration’s omission of the Jewish people in a Holocaust remembrance statement is an historical mistake.”

Trump administration officials have defended their statement, saying that it appropriately recognized the horrors of the Holocaust, which killed millions of people in addition to Jews.

Spicer accused critics of nitpicking and noted that the statement was written with the help of a person who is both Jewish and the descendant of Holocaust Survivors. Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner is both.

Nonetheless critics have said that omitting specific reference to Jews or anti-Semitism can be a form of Holocaust denial. The Nazis specifically set out to exterminate all the Jews of Europe.

Spicer says the director of the CIA will be added to the White House National Security Council.

Spicer says the president has decided to amend his recent memo restructuring the council to add CIA Director Mike Pompeo to the top circle of national security advisers. The restructuring also added White House senior adviser Steve Bannon to the council’s principals committee, which includes the secretaries of state and defense.

Trump’s move also directed the director of national intelligence and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to attend only when “issues pertaining to their responsibilities and expertise are to be discussed.”

But Spicer says those individuals will be welcome to attend the meetings. He disputed that the reorganization was a significant change from past administrations.

Trump will welcome Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to the United States next month.

Spicer said that Netanyahu will visit on Feb. 15. He said Trump looks forward to “discussing continued strategic, technological, military and intelligence cooperation.”

Trump has signaled strong support for Israel. Netanyahu on Sunday said that the American embassy in Israel should be moved from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, endorsing one of Trump’s campaign promises.</s>WASHINGTON – Hundreds of American diplomats defied a White House warning on Tuesday, sending a memo to the State Department’s leadership that criticizes President Donald Trump‘s temporary travel ban on citizens from seven Muslim-majority countries. It is believed to be one of the most popularly supported statements of dissent in the department’s history.

READ MORE: Justin Trudeau accused of letting Donald Trump get away with racism and hatred

A State Department official said the cable was received just a day after White House spokesman Sean Spicer suggested those disagreeing with Trump’s new policy should resign. The official did not have an exact number of signatories, but said more than 800 indicated they would sign after drafts of the cable circulated over the weekend. The official wasn’t authorized to discuss the matter publicly and demanded anonymity.

The document argues that the executive order Trump signed last week runs counter to American values and will fuel anti-American sentiment around the world.

“A policy which closes our doors to over 200 million legitimate travellers in the hopes of preventing a small number of travellers who intend to harm Americans from using the visa system to enter the United States will not achieve its aim of making our country safer,” the diplomats wrote in the so-called “dissent cable.”

“This ban stands in opposition to the core American and constitutional values that we, as federal employees, took an oath to uphold,” a draft of the cable said. The final version wasn’t immediately available.

Dissent channel cables are a mechanism for U.S. diplomats to register disagreement internally about U.S. policies. It was established during the Vietnam War and was most recently used by diplomats to criticize the Obama administration’s approach to Syria. In that case, former Secretary of State John Kerry met with signers of the cable to discuss their concerns.

Trump’s secretary of state nominee Rex Tillerson is still awaiting Senate confirmation and it was unclear how we would respond to the memo.

In response to reports of the cable Monday, Spicer said of the diplomats: “They should either get with the program or they can go.”

He dismissed the criticism from what he called “career bureaucrats.” While he later said Trump appreciates the work of public servants, Spicer said they should respect the desires of the American people and the importance Trump places on protecting the country.

Signers of dissent cables are supposed to be protected from retribution from superiors.

WATCH: NDP’s Mulcair slams Justin Trudeau for not denouncing U.S. travel ban on Muslim majority countries

The department, along with other agencies entrusted with implementing Trump’s order, has been confused about the details, offering several contradictory instructions to embassies and consulates on how it plans to do so.

As word of the executive order began to circulate last week, diplomats at some embassies began to prioritize visa applications from citizens of countries they suspected might be affected, according to officials.

On Friday, before the order was signed, workers at one embassy dumped bins of hundreds of approved passports on the floor to pull those from the affected countries and affix visas in them, officials said. That effort stopped when the order was signed, they said.

READ MORE: Arnold Schwarzenegger says Trump’s travel ban makes U.S. look ‘stupid’</s>The White House clashed Monday with a large group of American diplomats who are voicing dissent with Donald Trump’s temporary travel ban on citizens from seven Muslim-majority countries, challenging them to resign if they aren’t on board.

“They should either get with the program or they can go,” said Sean Spicer, Trump’s press secretary.

In startling language, Spicer dismissed the criticism from what he called “career bureaucrats.” While he later said Trump appreciates the work of public servants, Spicer said they should respect the desires of the American people and the importance Trump places on protecting the country.

“If somebody has a problem with that agenda, that does call into question whether they should continue in that post or not,” Spicer said. “This is about the safety of America.”

Spicer’s comments came after career diplomats circulated several drafts of a memo arguing that the executive order Trump signed last week will not make the U.S. safe, runs counter to American values and will fuel anti-American sentiment 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 from using the visa system to enter the United States will not achieve its aim of making our country safer,” the diplomats wrote in a so-called “dissent cable” being drafted for State Department leadership.

“This ban stands in opposition to the core American and constitutional values that we, as federal employees, took an oath to uphold,” a draft of the cable said.

U.S. officials said at least several hundred diplomats indicated they would sign the memo and that it was expected to be formally submitted Monday or Tuesday, pending edits to several drafts that were circulating. The final number of signatories will not be available until it is submitted, the officials said. The officials disclosed internal discussions on condition they not be quoted by name, in part because they feared retaliation.

Dissent channel cables are a mechanism for U.S. diplomats to register disagreement internally about U.S. policies. It was established during the Vietnam War and was most recently used by diplomats to criticize the Obama administration’s approach to Syria. In that case, former Secretary of State John Kerry met with signers of the cable to discuss their concerns.

Trump’s secretary of state nominee Rex Tillerson is still awaiting Senate confirmation and it was unclear how we would respond to the memo.

Spicer, however, was not sympathetic and defended the executive order. He said its impact had been “blown way out of proportion and exaggerated.”

Signers of dissent cables are protected from retribution from superiors and the State Department’s official response to the draft memo was less confrontational.

“The Dissent Channel is a long-standing official vehicle for State Department employees to convey alternative views and perspectives on policy issues,” department spokesman Mark Toner said. “This is an important process that the acting secretary, and the department as a whole, value and respect. It allows State employees to express divergent policy views candidly and privately to senior leadership.”

The department, along with other agencies that must implement Trump’s order, has been confused about its details and offered several contradictory instructions to embassies and consulates on how to do so, including how to handle dual citizens.

As word of the executive order began to circulate last week, diplomats at some embassies began to prioritize visa applications from citizens of countries they suspected might be affected, according to officials.

On Friday before the order was signed, workers at one embassy dumped bins of hundreds of approved passports on the floor to pull those from the affected countries and affix visas in them, the officials said. That effort stopped when the order was signed, they said.</s>STATE DEPARTMENT - A large number of foreign service officers and civil service personnel of the U.S. State Department signed a dissent document that was formally submitted Tuesday.

The State Department confirms to VOA that the memo in opposition to the president's executive order on immigration was received. But officials will not reveal the total number nor the ranks of those signing. Sources tell VOA the number is nearly 1,000.

The number of signatures, if it does total about 1,000, is “unprecedented” and about 20 times the number of dissenters for last year's memo from diplomats sharply criticizing the Obama administration's Syria policy, said former U.S. Ambassador to Syria, Robert Ford.

The huge numbers for the immigration memo and its early leaking “are clear indicators of the widespread concern within the department over this specific policy step and unease over the broad direction of foreign policy,” said Laura Kennedy, former deputy assistant secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs.

“These are extraordinary times,” she added.

White House spokesman Sean Spicer holds up documen White House spokesman Sean Spicer holds up documents comparing the makeup of the National Security Council (NSC) in the Trump and Obama administrations during his press briefing at the White House in Washington, D.C., Jan. 30, 2017. White House spokesman Sean Spicer holds up documents comparing the makeup of the National Security Council (NSC) in the Trump and Obama administrations during his press briefing at the White House in Washington, D.C., Jan. 30, 2017.

Spicer rejects criticism

The Trump administration argues that the new measures are necessary to “ensure the safety and security of the American people.” In a statement last weekend, it said the executive order “affects a minor portion of international travelers, and is the first step towards reestablishing control over America's borders and national security.”

But the Dissent Channel memo, a draft of which has been seen by VOA, says the order “will not achieve its aims and will likely be counterproductive.”

White House spokesman Sean Spicer rejected the criticism on Monday, telling reporters that those at the State Department who oppose President Donald Trump's immigration order “should either get with the program or they can go.”

Former diplomats comment

Former diplomats bristled at what is being perceived as a implicit threat against the foreign service community.

“The Dissent Channel is an entirely appropriate means of expressing opposition to the top leadership of the Department of State,” Ford told VOA. “The Trump people shouldn't take it so personally.”

“I was appalled by (Spicer's) comment,” said Kennedy, also a former ambassador to Turkmenistan, told VOA. “It either implied a complete misunderstanding of the dissent channel or the legal protections there are, or it's intended to send a signal that dissent, whether private or public, will not be tolerated.”

“The time-honored tradition of respectful dissent at State is supported by the very American and constitutional values that this cable honors and that the executive order tramples,” Yale University Law School professor Harold Hongju Koh, a former assistant secretary of state and State Department legal adviser, told VOA.

FILE - President Donald Trump signs an executive o US President Donald Trump signs an executive order to impose tighter vetting of travelers entering the United States, at the Pentagon in Washington, Jan. 27, 2017. US President Donald Trump signs an executive order to impose tighter vetting of travelers entering the United States, at the Pentagon in Washington, Jan. 27, 2017.

'The safety of Americans'

President Trump last Friday signed an executive order prohibiting entry to refugees and people from seven Muslim majority countries. The order includes a 120-day suspension of refugee admissions and a 90-day entry ban for people from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

Spicer added from the podium Monday the order is “about the safety of Americans” and the steps the president ordered are “common sense."

The draft of the dissent memo that was leaked expresses grave concerns that the travel ban will not achieve its goal "to protect the American people from terrorist attacks by foreign nationals admitted to the United States." It also warns that the action will "immediately sour relations" with key allies in the fight against terrorism, given many of the nations whose citizens are now restricted from traveling to U.S. soil.

The memo suggests alternatives, including improving visa and immigration screening.

Channel started in 1971

The Dissent Channel was established in 1971, amid disputes about Vietnam War policies, to allow U.S. diplomats to speak freely about foreign policy matters.

Typically four to five Dissent Channel messages are received each year, according to the State Department. Last year's Syria Dissent Channel memo had 51 signatures, according to diplomats.

When State Department or U.S. Agency for International Development employees believe their voices are not heard by supervisors, they may use the Dissent Channel. At the State Department, the policy planning staff is supposed to review it, circulate it to authorized people and reply in substance to the dissenters within 60 days.

Channel users protected

Those utilizing the Dissent Channel are protected from reprisals, disciplinary action or unauthorized disclosure of its use, according to the government's Foreign Affairs Manual.

Ford, who was a career member of the U.S. Foreign Service, predicted that if the White House tries to retaliate “they'll end up with lawsuits.” But Ford added that after expressing their opinion through the proper channels, foreign service officers are obligated to implement administration policy.

“It is their job to implement what the president and his team decide," explained Ford. " If they can't implement it then, frankly, they should think whether they should be in a government job."

Ford, currently a Senior Fellow at the Middle East Institute in Washington, acknowledged the challenge of U.S. diplomats in Baghdad having to explain “why this policy is a good policy” to their counterparts who fought alongside U.S. forces against terrorist elements.

“I can't imagine anything more difficult,” Ford said. Without proper guidance from Washington “they have to wing it which is even harder.”

Embassies sound off

Officials on Monday also revealed that the State Department is receiving multiple cables from its embassies about foreign anger concerning the restrictions on travel to the U.S. from the predominately Muslim countries in the executive order.

“As is standard, the State Department remains in contact with its embassies around the world on foreign policy issues,” a department official, speaking on condition of not being named, told VOA when asked about the cable. “We will not comment on internal communications.”

The president's nominee to be secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, has yet to be confirmed by the Senate. A vote on Tillerson, a recently retired oil and gas company executive, is expected this week.</s>The article you have been looking for has expired and is not longer available on our system. This is due to newswire licensing terms.</s>Just a few days after agencies scrambled to enforce President Donald Trump’s executive order that barred refugees and citizens from seven predominantly Muslim countries from coming to the United States, State Department employees are reportedly coming out against the travel ban en masse.

At least 200 State Department employees have signed onto internal memos harshly criticizing Trump’s order. According to Foreign Policy, there are a few different versions of the memo but all share a similar theme — that contrary to the White House’s assertion that the new rules are about protecting the United States, this ban “will increase anti-American sentiment” and “not achieve its stated aim of to [sic] protect the American people from terrorist attacks by foreign nations.” The memo added that the policy “runs counter to core American values of nondiscrimination, fair play and extending a warm welcome to foreign visitors and immigrants.” (A full draft of at least one of the reported memos is available here.)

Right now, this document is just floating around Foggy Bottom, but it will likely become a “dissent” cable, a formal process — begun during the Vietnam War — that State Department employees use to register opposition to a White House policy, which gets turned over to the secretary of State. This particular memo is a big deal for a few reasons, starting with the number of people who are registering their opposition. It’s also taken Trump less than two weeks to rile his cadre of diplomats — so early into his term that the secretary of State isn’t yet in place to receive the “dissent” cable once it’s filed. Rex Tillerson, likely to be confirmed by the Senate this week, will have to start his post with a restless agency, and figure out how to respond. (Last year, more than 50 State Department diplomats and bureaucrats caused a stir when they gave top diplomat John Kerry a “dissent” cable over former President Barack Obama’s Syria policies.)

The State Department confirmed that such a memo existed, and that it will “respect it,” according to the Washington Post. Acting secretary of State Thomas Shannon will probably end up receiving the cable. But it doesn’t appear, right now, that the dissent cable will do much to change the minds within Trumpworld — especially since world leaders, former high-ranking intelligence officials, and our allies on the front lines fighting ISIS don’t seem to be getting through to the administration. White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer, conceding that such a memo existed, told reporters those in disagreement needed to “either get with the program or they can go.”

“He’s been clear on it since taking office, that he’s going to put this safety of this country first. He is going to implement things that are in the best interest of the safety of this country prospectively, not re-actively,” Spicer continued. “And if somebody has a problem with that agenda then that does call into question whether or not they should continue in that post or not.”</s>On January 30, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer delivered a thinly veiled threat to the State Department officials who drafted a dissent memo against President Donald Trump’s executive order halting the refugee program and barring citizens from seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States. “Those career bureaucrats have a problem with it? They should either get with the program or they can go,” Spicer said, just days after the White House purged several senior officials who held administrative positions in the State Department. With these words, the Trump regime escalated its attack on the federal agencies that dare to disagree with its fiats.1

The five-page memo, which was signed by some 1,000 Foreign Service officers and submitted to Acting Secretary of State Tom Shannon yesterday, is a classic expression of the liberal internationalism that has characterized the State Department since the end of World War II. It blends a pragmatic defense of the US national interest with a principled argument on behalf of American values. “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 from using the visa system to enter the United States will not achieve its aim of making our country safer,” the memo reads. “Moreover, such a policy runs counter to core American values of nondiscrimination, fair play, and extending a warm welcome to foreign visitors and immigrants.”2

In many respects, the memo is extraordinary. With approximately 1,000 signatures, it is by far the biggest dissent message in the history of the State Department. The second-biggest dissent message in the department, written in response to Obama’s Syria policy, had 51 signatories. It is also part of a growing trend in which State Department dissenters have leaked their internal memos to the press. The first State Department officer to do so was Brady Kiesling, who resigned from the department in protest of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.3

At the same time, the massive protest against Trump’s executive order belongs to a long tradition of dissent in the diplomatic establishment. I wrote about the culture of dissent in the State Department in my book, The Dissent Paper: The Voices of Diplomats in the Cold War and Beyond. So embedded is the culture of dissent among career diplomats that the State Department has an official Dissent Channel. Created in 1971 during the Vietnam War, this mechanism allows rank-and-file Foreign Service officers to express their disagreements with the reigning policy directly to senior policymakers. The secretary of state is obliged to read and respond to all Dissent Channel messages within 90 days. To this day, the Dissent Channel has no parallel in other agencies of the federal government. It is a unique experiment in the management of bureaucratic dissent.4 Democracy Wins One as a Federal Court Strikes a Big Blow Against Gerrymandering Republicans Stole a Supreme Court Seat From Obama—and Are Putting Another Scalia In It Trump’s Crony Cabinet May Look Strong, but They Are Scared The People Are Leading the Politicians in the Fight Against Trump The history of the Dissent Channel is anything but a story of friendly relations between rank-and-file diplomats and high-level policy-makers. Rather it is a testament to the perennial power struggles that take place between bureaucrats and elected officials. During the Second World War, the diplomatic service began to transform from a backwater of conservative, striped-pants aristocrats to more of a middle-class meritocracy that tended to attract liberals. That is partly why it was a central object of McCarthyist attacks in the 1950s. The Dissent Channel emerged in response to the heightened influence of the antiwar movement in the State Department beginning in the late 1960s. In April 1970, 20 Foreign Service officers wrote a letter to Secretary of State William Rogers condemning the invasion of Cambodia. Nixon privately seethed about the unruly bureaucrats at Foggy Bottom. “We have no discipline in the bureaucracy,” he complained to Kissinger. “We never fire anybody. We always promote the sons of bitches that kick us in the ass.… When a bureaucrat deliberately thumbs his nose, we’re going to get him.… The little boys over in State particularly, that are against us, we will do it.”5 The stakes are higher now than ever. Get The Nation in your inbox. Although Nixon privately fantasized about firing dissenting diplomats, his administration ended up adopting a different approach. Rather than condemn the expression of dissent, it took the lead in implementing the Dissent Channel and celebrating it publicly. As plugging leaks increasingly became a priority, the channel promised to contain the potential flood. “The right of dissent is very important. And no one’s been pushing for it harder than I,” said Undersecretary of State William Macomber, “But we want to keep it in the house.”6 Since its creation, hundreds of memos have been submitted through the Dissent Channel. Few of these have had a direct impact on the policies they have protested. Most State Department officers have accepted this reality. Thomas Boyatt, a Foreign Service officer who delivered a prescient dissent memo on Cyprus in 1974, which was ignored by Kissinger, said that the Dissent Channel “helps to defuse the inevitable tensions policy disagreements generate.” Over the decades, the Dissent Channel has came to serve as a tool for achieving a certain détente between dissenting diplomats and presidents who might otherwise feel threatened by them. It gave State Department officers a regulated space to voice their views. It gave the secretary of state and White House an opportunity to quell and contain dissent.7 Although some users of the Dissent Channel were transferred from their geographic regions of expertise, remarkably few were dismissed. And many were promoted to senior positions in the department. There are even awards given out by the American Foreign Service Association for constructive dissent. Boyatt, a recipient of this award, became ambassador to Upper Volta (now Burkina Faso) and Colombia. When the dissent memo about Syria leaked to the press last June, Secretary of State John Kerry expressed support for career diplomats’ right to disagree with the administration’s policy.8 This working arrangement between dissenting diplomats and the White House has come to an abrupt end. In addition to risking the lives of thousands of refugees, students, scholars, and green-card holders, the Trump administration is threatening to destroy the careers of dozens of individuals who have devoted their lives to advancing US diplomacy around the world. This will no doubt send chills down the spines of the thousands of people who work for the State Department. In effect, Trump is emptying out and silencing the State Department from top to bottom. If the administration continues this crackdown, we may soon find out what a nation without career diplomats looks like. The only silver lining to this petty and dangerous war on bureaucrats in the State Department, as well as on careerists in the Environmental Protection Agency and National Parks Service, is that the public is coming to appreciate the value of bureaucracy—and dissent.9</s>New York Times: “Within hours, a State Department dissent cable, asserting that President Trump’s executive order to temporarily bar citizens from seven Muslim-majority countries would not make the nation safer, traveled like a chain letter — or a viral video.”

“The cable wended its way through dozens of American embassies around the world, quickly emerging as one of the broadest protests by American officials against their president’s policies. And it is not over yet.”

“By 4 p.m. on Tuesday, the letter had attracted around 1,000 signatures, State Department officials said, far more than any dissent cable in recent years. It was being delivered to management, and department officials said more diplomats wanted to add their names to it.”
The State Department memorandum about concerns with this travel ban is submitted to acting Secretary of State Tom Shannon through the federal government's Dissent Channel. This protest memo had between 900-1,000 signatures. Department officials said these signatures are far more than any dissent cable in recent years, adding more diplomats want to add their names to it.