The U.S. intelligence system is experiencing its biggest shakeup in two decades. As President Donald Trump accelerates his "cleansing of the deep state" campaign, Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard announced on Wednesday that the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) will cut nearly half its staff, reshaping the agency established after the 9/11 attacks.

According to an internal memo sent by Gabbard to employees, this reform plan called "ODNI 2.0" will take effect by the end of fiscal year 2025, and is expected to reduce the size of the ODNI by more than 40%, saving about $700 million annually in government spending.

"We must accelerate our pace toward a high-performing team," said a senior official to the Daily Mail. "For the past two decades, the ODNI has remained largely untouched. Now we are finally making real change."

Staff Reduction: From 2,000 to 1,300

Although the exact number of ODNI employees remains confidential, insiders revealed that the workforce was between 1,850 and 2,000 when Gabbard took office. After the major layoffs announced on Wednesday, the agency is expected to retain approximately 1,300 staff members.

The layoffs are not a single action but a series of measures:

  • Directly laying off a group of current staff;
  • Reducing the size through a "no replacement" policy, meaning vacant positions will not be filled;
  • Personnel transferred from other intelligence agencies will be returned to their original departments.

Senator Tom Cotton, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, even proposed further reduction, cutting the ODNI down to 650 people. Cotton argues that the ODNI has long been "bureaucratic and redundant," becoming one of the least efficient parts of the U.S. intelligence system. However, even some senior officials within the ODNI have admitted that a size of 650 people is "too small to effectively fulfill regulatory responsibilities."

Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee Tom Cotton

Trump's Will and the "Deep State" Cleansing

In Washington's political narrative, Trump's relationship with the intelligence community has always been tense. Since the 2016 election, he has repeatedly accused agencies such as the CIA, FBI, and ODNI of secretly manipulating the political landscape, even using the term "deep state" publicly, accusing the intelligence circle of forming an invisible power network against the president.

The launch of the "ODNI 2.0" plan is widely interpreted as Trump's latest move to fulfill his "cleaning the swamp" promise. Two weeks ago, Gabbard and National Security Advisor Marco Rubio had already reported the details of the reform to the president, who gave clear approval.

"DEI (Direct Intelligence) and some redundant positions harm national security. Every position must add value," said a senior official bluntly.

The Trump camp emphasized that this reform is not only about budget cuts but also about "reaffirming loyalty" — ensuring the intelligence community serves the president's strategy closely, rather than becoming an independent "fourth power."

The Birth and Controversy of the ODNI

To understand the historical significance of this layoff, one must trace back to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. It was due to serious information barriers between agencies like the CIA and FBI at the time, where intelligence was not integrated, that led to the establishment of the ODNI.

In 2004, the U.S. Congress passed a law establishing the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), whose responsibility is to coordinate 18 different intelligence agencies and provide unified intelligence briefings to the president.

However, from the beginning, the ODNI was criticized as a "superfluous layer." Former CIA officials have stated that the ODNI lacks the covert operations capabilities of the CIA and the law enforcement powers of the FBI, and it is more of a "coordinating committee," yet it incurs huge costs.

Over the past two decades, the value of the ODNI has been controversial. Supporters argue that it helps prevent another 9/11-style intelligence failure; opponents claim it creates bureaucratic redundancy and inefficiency. The recent layoffs pushed by Trump can be seen as the latest chapter in this long-standing debate.

Major Reorganization: Closures and Mergers

Aside from layoffs, the ODNI will also undergo structural adjustments:

  • The Foreign Malicious Influence Center (FMIC) will be completely closed. This department was originally responsible for monitoring propaganda and disinformation campaigns by countries such as Russia and China, but in the eyes of the Trump administration, this institution is "heavily politicized," and its research conclusions are often used to question the president himself.
  • The National Intelligence University (NIU) will be merged with the National Defense University (NDU), and will be overseen by the Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth in the future. This means that the authority over intelligence training and education will also be partially transferred to the Pentagon.
  • The satellite campus in Reston, Virginia, will also be closed. As a think tank affiliated with the ODNI, the National Intelligence Council (NIC) will be fully integrated into the headquarters structure in the future, no longer operating as a separate entity.

This integration is described as "decentralization": the ODNI will shrink to a smaller, more streamlined coordination hub rather than a large independent organization.

Shift in Priorities: AI Replacing Counterterrorism

More attention has been drawn to the shift in strategic focus, rather than just the layoffs.

For the past two decades, the U.S. intelligence community has invested heavily in counterterrorism, especially extremist groups like ISIS. However, a senior ODNI official revealed that the focus has now shifted to artificial intelligence (AI) and its role in great-power competition.

"Countering foreign insurgents is no longer our core mission. We must invest more resources to study how foreign powers use AI to threaten the United States," the official said.

This aligns with the Trump administration's emphasis on "great-power competition rather than counterterrorism" and resonates with calls from some Republican lawmakers for a "shift eastward."

Support and Criticism: Division Within the Intelligence Community

After the announcement of the reforms, reactions were mixed both inside and outside Washington.

Supporters believe that the bureaucratic system of the ODNI has become bloated and must be "trimmed." They point out that, given tight budgets, the layoffs could save billions of dollars for taxpayers annually, while forcing the intelligence community to focus on true priorities.

Critics, however, worry that the layoffs may lead to loss of information and coordination vacuum. "In the field of national security, we cannot simply focus on cost," warned a senior intelligence official. "If the cuts are too severe, we might pay a high price in the next crisis."

Some Democratic legislators have even openly called it a "political purge." They fear that Trump is using "reform" as a pretext to eliminate experts and career bureaucrats who disagree with his policies.

International Reaction and Ally Concerns

Notably, America's allies are also paying close attention to these layoffs. A NATO diplomat privately stated that the ODNI is an important interface for allied intelligence exchanges, and "if it shrinks drastically, transatlantic intelligence cooperation will be affected."

Former MI6 officials in the UK have even stated that the "top-down cuts" in the U.S. intelligence system could weaken the coordination capacity of the Five Eyes alliance.

Nevertheless, the Trump administration is unconcerned. A White House advisor responded, "The U.S. will continue to fulfill its alliance obligations, but we first need to ensure that the intelligence system is efficient and loyal, not maintaining a group of bureaucrats who do not answer to the people."

Since its establishment after the 9/11 attacks in 2001, the ODNI has faced its largest institutional contraction. In the last sentence of Gabbard's memo, she simply wrote one word: "Thank you." A brief closing statement, yet it conceals the historical significance of this upheaval.

Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7540932192697025039/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author. Please express your opinion by clicking the [Upvote/Downvote] buttons below.