The U.S. Department of State’s “Dissent Channel”
April 7, 2017
The U.S. Department of State’s “Dissent Channel”
Two recently leaked Dissent Channel messages pertaining
Rusk’s legacy to explore alternative foreign policy ideas.
to the Obama Administration’s policy toward Syria and the
Per recommendation by Task Force VII on the Stimulation
Trump Administration’s first travel ban on seven Muslim-
of Creativity, Secretary Rogers formally established the
majority countries have helped facilitate broader political
Dissent Channel to hear “well-thought-out dissent” ideas
debate and scrutiny of both policies. Congress’s decisions
that otherwise would not reach him or senior officials
regarding the Department of State’s Dissent Channel
through preexisting channels.
messages, including the questions of whether Congress
should receive notification of, or even access to, such
Former Under Secretary for Political Affairs Nicholas
messages may impact the nature of the Department’s
Burns, the third-ranking DOS official serving in the George
deliberations on paramount foreign policy issues and how
W. Bush Administration, stressed the value his boss,
its employees use the Dissent Channel.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, placed on the Dissent
Channel for two reasons. One, the Channel allows DOS
What Is the Dissent Channel?
personnel to express dissenting views on issues central to
The U.S. Department of State (DOS) has long maintained
“U.S. foreign policy,” and, two, dissenting views offer
an internal communications procedure known as the
expert advice to the leadership that ultimately benefits the
“Dissent Channel.” According to DOS’s Foreign Affairs
department and the nation. Burns also emphasized the
Manual (FAM), the Dissent Channel allows any U.S.
importance of confidentiality on all Dissent Channel
citizen employee of DOS or USAID to “express dissenting
messages to allow internal discussions on policy.
views on substantive issues of policy in a manner which
ensures serious, high-level review, and response” by the
It is difficult to track the number of received Dissent
Secretary of State and senior officials. The FAM conveys
Channel messages since its inception in 1971 because of the
codified statutory, executive orders, and mandates with
sensitivity and classification of the messages. Public record
respect to Department of State’s policies, procedures, and
indicates DOS receives only a small number of these
structures. 2 FAM 070 describes Dissent Channel
messages annually. Internal sources showed DOS received
messages, including the identity of their authors, as “a most
more than “200 Dissent Channel messages between 1971
sensitive element in the internal deliberative process.” In
and 1995.” The Dissent Channel continues to provide DOS
ensuring the facilitation of “open, creative, and uncensored
employees direct access to the Secretary of State and senior
dialogue” on foreign policy matters, authors are expressly
officials on substantive policy matters.
protected from any penalty, reprisal, or recrimination. FAM
instruction allows the author to classify a Dissent Channel
Handling of Dissent Channel Messages
message “as appropriate,” thus requiring the author to
At each overseas mission, the chief of mission (COM)—the
follow the government classification system under
ambassador in most cases—is responsible for the overall
Executive Order 13526.
direction, coordination, and supervision of all U.S.
government executive branch employees. In line with this
Origins and History
authority, the COM is charged with the following Dissent
The origins of the Dissent Channel can be traced to
Channel responsibilities:
Secretary of State Dean Rusk, who served in the John F.
Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson Administrations from
educate the workforce about the intent of the Dissent
1961 to 1969. According to Historical Research
Channel;
Memorandum dated August 1982 from the Office of the
facilitate the Dissent Channel transmission to the
Historian of the Department of State, Rusk laid the
Secretary of State and senior officials;
groundwork for Secretary of State William P. Rogers to
safeguard Dissent Channel sources and contents; and
formally establish the Dissent Channel in 1971.
protect Dissent Channel authors from reprisal.
Three offices are responsible for overall Dissent Channel
In many areas, Secretary Rusk propelled DOS forward with
management and are entrusted with ensuring diplomats
new management concepts, tools, and strategies. In 1967,
Rusk created the Secretary’s Open Forum, an office with
have a direct communication line to the Secretary of State
and senior officials on substantive foreign policy and
designation S/OF, with the responsibility to bring “new or
alternative policy recommendations” to him and senior
national security issues.
staff. Rusk also offered Foreign Service professionals more
S/P (Secretary/Policy) is responsible for managing
interagency work opportunities and expanded training in
Dissent Channel messages.
science, technology, and population growth.
S/OF (Secretary/Open Forum) is responsible for
monitoring the Dissent Chanel operation and providing
Secretary Rogers, who served in the Richard M. Nixon
clearance on all responses.
Administration from 1969 to 1973, continued Secretary
https://crsreports.congress.gov
The U.S. Department of State’s “Dissent Channel”
OIG (Office of Inspector General) is responsible for
In addition to the use of the Dissent Channel, Foreign
investigating “all reports of improprieties related to use
Service professionals have expressed policy disagreement
of the Dissent Channel and for recommending
in other ways. Foreign Service professionals gravitate
appropriate action.”
toward one of four options when presented with a new
order: follow the order, seek an assignment not affected by
In general, S/P distributes Dissent Channel cables or
the new order, use the Dissent Channel, or resign.
memos to the Secretary, the Deputy Secretary, the Under
Secretary for Political Affairs, the S/OF Chair, and, if the
Follow the order: Foreign Service professionals
author is a USAID employee, to the USAID Administrator.
generally favor the “follow the order” tenet, because
Depending on the subject matter, the Dissent Channel
their job requires following Administration policy
author may request S/P to limit or increase distribution. If
despite personal views.
there are any signs of Dissent Channel improprieties, the
Seek an assignment not affected by the new policy:
OIG, in consultation with S/P, provides investigative
Foreign Service professionals may request a new
responsibilities and recommends appropriate actions. S/P
assignment that is not affected by the new policy.
has two working days to acknowledge receipt of the
Dissent Channel: Foreign Service professionals may
message and 30-60 working days to provide a substantive
write a Dissent Channel message to the Secretary of
reply to the author.
State and senior officials with a dissenting view.
Dissent Channel Outcomes
Resign: Those who are against the policy may choose to
resign. For example, in addition to sending a Dissent
The Department of State does not make Dissent Channel
Channel message, Foreign Service officers Ann Wright,
messages public, rendering it difficult to surmise the broad
John Brady Kiesling, and John H. Brown resigned over
effects of these messages on U.S. foreign policy decision
a policy disagreement regarding the war in Iraq.
making. However, analysis of those few messages that are
publicly available indicates Dissent Channel messages may
Internet Impacts
rarely impact foreign policy.
The Internet has affected how the Department of State’s
13,800 Foreign Service, 11,200 Civil Service, and 50,400
For example, in 1971, Consul General Archer Blood and 20
Locally Employed Staff employees at 275 posts in 195
members of his staff sent a Dissent Channel telegram
urging the Nixon Administration to intervene in “selective
countries collaborate with one another on topics of strategic
genocide” in East Pakistan (today Bangladesh) and
importance to the nation. The recently leaked Dissent
Channel message on the Trump Administration’s travel ban
predicting the emergence of a new nation. Nixon’s
“friendship with [Pakistan] President Yahya” and Nixon’s
is a case in point. Using modern telecommunications tools,
DOS employees crowdsourced its Dissent Channel
China policy prompted his Administration to tilt its policy
message, reportedly resulting in nearly 1,000 DOS
toward Pakistan as a counterbalance to the Soviets in the
employees signing the message. The large number of
region. Unhappy with the telegram, the Nixon
employees, in turn, created challenges to control the
Administration pressured Secretary of State Rogers to
confidentiality of the message.
reassign Blood to Washington.
Issues for Congress
In 2003 and 2004, then Foreign Service officers Anne
Wright, John Brady Kiesling, John H. Brown, and Keith W.
Although the Dissent Channel process is an internal policy
Mines used the Dissent Channel to present their dissenting
deliberation mechanism within the Department of State, the
views on the George W. Bush Administration’s policies in
recent media attention associated with leaked Dissent
Iraq. In 2016, 51 diplomats offered an alternative policy
Channel messages has renewed congressional scrutiny over
option on Syria’s long-standing civil war. In 2017, nearly
the program. Key questions have focused on whether there
1,000 diplomats, according to various news outlets,
could be a congressional role in preserving confidentiality
endorsed an alternative policy option to President Trump’s
or receiving notice of Dissent Channel messages and
Executive Order: Protecting the Nation from Foreign
whether expanded congressional access to such messages
Terrorist Entry into the United States. Like the Blood
would have a chilling effect on the use of the Dissent
telegram, none of these messages appear to have resulted in
Channel.
the Administration shifting its policy.
Cory R. Gill, Analyst in Foreign Affairs
One Dissent Channel that did appear to have a policy
Susan B. Epstein, Specialist in Foreign Policy
impact is a leaked 1992 Bosnian Dissent Channel message,
which has been credited as an impetus to the Dayton
IF10631
Accords in 1995.
https://crsreports.congress.gov
The U.S. Department of State’s “Dissent Channel”
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF10631 · VERSION 6 · NEW