Planned job cuts at the Foreign Office – a questionable signal in times of chronic overload

The announcement of plans to cut approximately 570 positions at the Federal Foreign Office by 2029 raises significant questions from a legal perspective. The ministry justifies this sweeping restructuring with the aim of strengthening and increasing the effectiveness of security- and economic-driven foreign policy. However, the reality in the consular sector – particularly in the processing of visa applications – paints a completely different picture : For years, the Federal Foreign Office has consistently based its legal arguments on the claim of severe staff shortages . Those who file lawsuits for inaction against visa delays before German administrative courts repeatedly encounter the same pattern of argumentation: overwork, a lack of skilled personnel, and structural capacity constraints.

In light of this official self-description, the now-announced staff reductions appear contradictory and hardly comprehensible . Anyone who publicly declares that visa procedures take months due to a lack of resources can hardly simultaneously present the elimination of hundreds of positions as strategically essential. This discrepancy damages confidence in a reliable foreign and consular administration – and it affects precisely those areas in which Germany already regularly lags behind in the international competition for skilled workers .

Reform under the guise of modernization

The reform presented by the state secretaries is considered the most significant structural change at the Foreign Office in decades. It envisions the consolidation and reorganization of nearly all country and specialist departments. Europe, the Americas, Asia/Pacific, and the Near and Middle East/Africa will form independent regional blocs. Security policy, international order, and geoeconomics will be combined into separate, newly structured departments.

On paper, the reform aims to “set priorities” and increase foreign policy effectiveness. However, anyone familiar with how the Foreign Service operates knows that strategic realignment and staff reductions rarely go hand in hand . An efficient and modern foreign policy requires not fewer personnel, but rather qualified specialists capable of handling complex procedures in both the political and consular spheres.

Consular services remain the neglected stepchild of the reform.

It is particularly problematic that the planned savings are largely concentrated at the headquarters in Berlin , even though the visa office there has been a bottleneck for years. Visa applications regularly take months to process , and in some embassies and consulates, even longer than a year. Businesses wait for urgently needed skilled workers, applicants lose job offers, families are separated – and the agency repeatedly cites structural bottlenecks. Against this backdrop, the reference to a blanket eight percent reduction in staff seems unrealistic . The workload at the Foreign Office has not decreased; on the contrary, global political crises, increasing mobility, and more complex migration policies require significantly more consular capacity. A ministry that currently seeks to modernize should be strengthening precisely these areas, instead of further structurally thinning them out.

A dangerous signal in international competition

Germany is in global competition for skilled workers . Delayed visa procedures are among its biggest competitive disadvantages. When a country structurally weakens its foreign policy administration and publicly communicates that job cuts are solely due to budget constraints, it sends the wrong signal to businesses, skilled workers, and partner countries.

The reform may be politically desired, but in practice it could lead to a further slowdown of already overburdened processes . A particularly critical issue is the lack of a clear answer to how consular services will be stabilized despite staff reductions. When personnel shortages are cited as the reason, the argument loses its credibility and the reform its substantive foundation.

Conclusion: Modernization requires resources, not savings.

It is understandable that the Foreign Office is reconsidering its priorities in light of geopolitical challenges. However, modernization does not automatically mean downsizing. The planned staff reductions pose a significant risk to visa processing, which is essential for businesses and skilled workers . From a legal perspective, the discrepancy is particularly striking: In court, the ministry regularly emphasizes that delays are unavoidable and due to a lack of capacity. Yet now, the same department is being reduced in staff – precisely at a time when the German government is actively promoting increased skilled immigration. Instead of cutting jobs, the Foreign Office should finally increase staffing in the positions that are central to Germany's migration and foreign trade policies. Only in this way can the "effectiveness" mentioned in the letter from the state secretaries actually be achieved.