US National Security Faces Competence Gap as Over 1,300 Federal Hires Prioritize Loyalty

A prominent voice in AI policy, Miles Brundage, has issued a stark warning regarding the United States' national security, asserting that prioritizing personal loyalty over professional competence in government hiring and retention is creating significant risks. This comes amidst recent reports detailing new federal hiring practices that emphasize allegiance to the administration, impacting thousands of positions, including those critical to national security. The concern is that such policies could leave the nation vulnerable in an increasingly complex global landscape.

Brundage articulated his apprehension on social media, stating: > "I think people massively underestimate how much national security risk the US is creating for itself by prioritizing personal loyalty over competence in government hiring + retention. We are not in the 90s anymore in terms of geopolitics or technology + are on very thin ice..." His statement underscores a belief that the demands of modern statecraft necessitate highly skilled and experienced personnel.

Recent reports indicate a significant shift in federal recruitment, with White House screening teams implementing what critics describe as "loyalty tests" for job applicants. These new requirements, which include essay questions about supporting the president's policy priorities, apply to positions from GS-5 upwards. White House officials defend the approach, stating that over 1,300 individuals have been hired under these guidelines, all while maintaining "the highest standards of competency."

However, this approach has drawn sharp criticism from federal workers, watchdog groups, and experts. They argue that mandating political allegiance undermines the foundational principles of a non-partisan civil service and risks eroding institutional knowledge. Concerns have been specifically raised about the potential ousting of experienced foreign policy and national security diplomats and specialists.

Brundage's emphasis on evolving technology highlights the critical need for expertise. His previous work, including a 2018 report on the malicious use of artificial intelligence, details how advancements in AI can expand existing threats, introduce new ones, and alter the character of digital, physical, and political security. Managing such sophisticated challenges, from automated cyberattacks to disinformation campaigns, demands unparalleled technical and strategic competence.

The geopolitical landscape, as Brundage noted, is also far removed from the relative stability of the 1990s, characterized by rapid technological shifts and complex international dynamics. This environment requires a deep well of specialized knowledge and analytical rigor within government ranks. Prioritizing loyalty could inadvertently sideline the very expertise needed to navigate these intricate global challenges effectively.

Ultimately, the tension between loyalty and competence in federal hiring presents a significant dilemma for U.S. national security. As the nation confronts increasingly sophisticated threats and a volatile international order, the ability to attract and retain the most capable individuals, irrespective of political alignment, remains paramount for safeguarding national interests.