The atmosphere was tense. Teams from Elon Musk’s Department for Government Efficiency, fondly known as DOGE, had already cleared out the U.S. Institute of Peace, including its board, interim president, and longstanding external legal team. However, until late Friday night on March 28, one could wish that the fallout would somehow remain minimal. Then, sadly, dismissal notifications began to circulate through personal email accounts. Little did they know, this was only the beginning.
When Musk took his leave from Washington, he left behind a battered bureaucracy. DOGE established a reliable strategy: Materialize on site, seize control of all infrastructure and IT resources, discard the existing management and introduce its own. After that, the employees would be let go. These swift actions ensured that both targets and the judicial system had hardly any time to respond or mend the damage already done.
Over the last four months, thousands of civil servants have witnessed this strategy unfold. Yet, one organization stands out – The Institute of Peace. Although a modest entity of about 300 employees, it was the only one able to overturn DOGE’s onslaught in court. In a twist of fate, what was taken from them during a whirlwind weekend, now belongs to the original board and interim chief once more.
Underneath the celebration of this victory lies a sobering question posed by a U.S. District Judge at a hearing: A victory yields no guarantees about whether it will be feasible or how strenuous it might be to restore the U.S. Institute of Peace. Summing it up, the judge remarked, ‘A bull in a china shop shatters lots of things.’
Now, nearly three weeks after the favorable verdict, the institute is gradually getting back on its feet. Nevertheless, there are obstacles and restoration might not equate to full recovery. For the rest of the agencies and departments grappling with their own DOGE encounters, this example serves as a warning.
The peace-promoting entity was a result of legislation passed in the 1980s, with President Ronald Reagan officially signing it into law in 1985. Represented as an autonomous, non-profit policy institute funded by the federal legislature, its core purpose was to foster peace and resolve conflicts by bypassing the usual conduits such as the State Department.
This establishment was among the four victims targeted by President Donald Trump’s Feb 19 Executive Order 14217. Allegedly, the directive’s purpose was to ‘significantly downsize the federal government.’ The implications of these actions sent shockwaves and left deep, multi-layered scars.
Firstly, employees of the institute – not being government personnel – were left without access to governmental perks and protections for civil servants. Without warning, their insurance evaporated, leaving employees grappling with health issues in a dire state. Another casualty of the abrupt order was the wide network of international partnerships, leaving a sea of supporters stranded overnight.
Two weeks after the rollback, barely 10% of the usual workforce, around 25 individuals, were stationed at the headquarters. Their tasks now included maintenance work, re-establishing systems and securing the institute’s financial resources. Any visible damage was more a result of negligence than any cruel intent— spoiled food, unaddressed leakages, security barriers that needed attention.
However, restoring complete functionality to the systems will be a significant challenge. As a consequence, employees face indefinite leave and offices internationally are forced to remain shut. The sudden turn of events still echoes throughout the organization, and the journey to recovery has only just begun.
While the jobs of many were spared at the Institute of Peace, the story serves as a stark reminder of the rapid and ruthless measures employed by DOGE under Elon Musk’s leadership. For those who still face these challenges, the story of the Institute of Peace serves as both a lesson learned and a beacon of resilience and hope.
Natural attrition and the fair and equitable restructuring of governmental departments is one thing. The pace, ruthlessness, and seemingly impersonal actions of DOGE as they implemented their mandate, however, raises valid questions around employees’ rights and the sustainability of such measures.
As the Institute of Peace embarks on its quest to heal and rebuild, it sends a clear message to others: reclaiming what was lost in the face of an imposing force is not impossible. It will require perseverance, a collective spirit, and the unwavering belief that peace and strategic policy intervention can and must prevail, regardless of the jarring unpredictability of federal power dynamics.