Special Envoy: How Robert Malley Achieved A Quantum State Of Suspension

Inspector General report points to political considerations

“Special Envoy Malley continued to work for approximately 10 weeks before he was placed on leave without pay and directed to cease working on Department business,” reads the report of the State Department Office of Inspector General released this week. Although “OIG did not review the bases for the suspension,” they found “the Department violated the Authorities Act” by failing to report the allegations against Robert Malley and used a “questionable justification” to restore his access to a sensitive network.

Incredibly, Malley was allowed to continue working almost as normal. “OIG found evidence that Mr. Malley regularly communicated with White House officials and was kept apprised about secure telephone calls and meetings with a wide range of agencies, including the Central Intelligence Agency, the Office of Director of National Intelligence, and Departments of Defense, Justice, and Treasury.” Confused by his continued access, officials kept him in the loop. “Malley was periodically blind carbon-copied (bcc) on email communications that concealed his inclusion in ongoing email conversations from participants.”

“Malley’s advice was also regularly sought and provided on issues including media talking points and Congressional testimony,” the report reads. The good news is that “OIG did not find evidence that the OpenNet restoration allowed Special Envoy Malley to access classified information.” By restoring Malley’s access and including him in policy discussions, however, the State Department took “a serious risk that he would be privy to highly sensitive information that should not have been shared with an employee whose security clearance was suspended.”

Worst of all, because Malley was a prestigious political appointee rather than a federal employee, he got special treatment. “PDAS [Carlos] Matus told OIG it is not uncommon for employees with suspended clearances to have their access restored, but he also stated that he generally does not get involved in the decision to restore access and did so in this case due to Special Envoy Malley’s high-profile position in the Department.”

Matus was on uncertain ground, for Malley was the first high-level political appointee to ever lose a security clearance. “Due to the lack of precedent, there was uncertainty about how to address the situation. The lack of such procedures affected several key decisions regarding Mr. Malley.”

OIG also found that the lack of standard policies for political appointees and the lack of supervision of Special Envoy Malley led to significant confusion as to what work Mr. Malley was authorized to do following the suspension. The Department failed to consistently notify employees who regularly interacted with Mr. Malley that he was no longer allowed to access classified information. These conditions likely led to Special Envoy Malley engaging on issues outside the limited scope of issues on which he was authorized to work. Finally, OIG found that the Department did not report the allegations against Mr. Malley to OIG, as required by the Department of State Authorities Act.

Malley was treated differently in two key ways: his restored OpenNet access, and delays in the notification process of his clearance suspension.

When normal people have their security clearances suspended, they are notified to visit a central office to have their badges confiscated. If they are allowed to continue working in unclassified capacities, supervisors ensure that their entire offices know about the employee with the suspended clearance.

“In Special Envoy Malley’s case, the [Office of Personnel Security and Suitability] Director told OIG that if the DS/PSS/AA official met him in person at HST and then accompanied him to the badging office without the intermediate step of going to DS headquarters, he would avoid being recognized and be spared potential embarrassment.” The risk of personally embarrassing a political employee was judged to be greater than the risks that an irregular process presented to national security.

Special treatment simply externalized the embarrassment to other people. His assistant, for example, “could not explain Special Envoy Malley’s intermitent exclusion when asked about it by foreign and U.S. government interlocutors.” Mally lingered in a quasi-state of suspension.

Based on “adverse information” received “in late March or early April of 2023,” the report reads. “On April 22, 2023, DS/IS/APD issued a ‘No Systems Access’ IFAR for Special Envoy Malley.” The left hand department had passed the matter to the right hand department, but problems began when Carlos Matus, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary (PDAS), told the Branch Chief of the Division of Adverse Actions “to delay the delivery pending notification of Special Envoy Malley’s suspended clearance to senior Department officials.”

Now irony inserted itself. Even as Malley was granted a day’s grace by the delay, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken’s chief of staff “promptly ensured that the Secretary did not engage with Mr. Malley after his clearance was suspended, because the Secretary wished to recuse himself from engaging on Mr. Malley’s situation given their longstanding personal acquaintance.” While Blinken had covered his own political buttocks with both hands, he still left the department without guidance on Malley or a clear understanding that his clearance had been suspended. As a result, confusion reigned.

National security was secondary to political self-preservation. “The Branch Chief and Special Assistant waited all day for PDAS Matus to give them approval to deliver the letter to Special Envoy Malley, but it did not occur. Eventually, at the urging of the Branch Chief, DS officials arranged to meet Special Envoy Malley at HST on Saturday, April 22, 2023, to deliver the notification letter.” In the meantime, Malley had been able to participate in a secure conference call with White House officials. “OIG did not interview Special Envoy Malley and could not confirm that he actually participated on the call, but the Deputy Special Envoy said that Special Envoy Malley usually would have participated in calls like this one.”

OIG reviewed the use of Special Envoy Malley’s building access badge for entering and exiting HST on April 21 and verified that he was in the building at the time of the call and exited for the day at 4:53 p.m. According to his badge access swipe, at 1:58 p.m. Special Envoy Malley accessed the controlled office where the call would have occurred.

Three days after Robert Malley should have been thanked for his service and shown out the door, never to be allowed unescorted in any classified area of any government office building until the adjudication of the suspension, political pressure restored his access to sensitive communications. Executive Secretary of State Ambassador Kamala Lakhdhir “emailed PDAS Matus and requested that Special Envoy Malley’s OpenNet access be restored, ‘in particular to use [his] state.gov’ email.”

Lakhdhir made two arguments. First, Malley needed to tell his “team, USG colleagues and counterparts in other governments that he is on leave.” Second, Malley was to continue working with family members of Americans held in Iran, and Lakhdhir “wanted him to be able to do so using official accounts” instead of using a personal email account. The OIG report notes that “the routine use of unofficial email accounts as the primary means to conduct official business is prohibited by Department policies.”

Robert Malley had achieved a quantum state of security clearance suspension. For ten weeks, he “was periodically blind carbon-copied (bcc) on email communications that concealed his inclusion in ongoing email conversations from participants” because staff at all levels knew he was still involved in policy discussions. “Special Envoy Malley continued working until June 29, 2023, when he was placed on leave without pay and told to cease all Department work,” bringing an end to this unique laboratory experiment in unaccountability.

Malley carried over from the Obama administration to the Biden administration because of his role in the nuclear deal with Iran. He has been unable to revive the deal, and despite unexpected election results after the accidental death of President Ebrahim Raisi, Iran seems increasingly emboldened to reach the nuclear threshold. If Donald Trump wins in November, there will be no new deal. If Kamala Harris wins, she will inherit a policy failure as well as most of the people who created it.

All those years that Democrats courted the clerics, wasted. The Robert Malley saga has been one embarrassing, still only partly-explained chapter in the epic failure of nuclear détente policy. This affair deserves as many hearings as the Iran-Contra scandal. Americans always end up hoodwinked by carpet salesmen, for they are too happy just to be inside the bazaar.