In recent developments in Washington, President Donald Trump’s decision to dismiss national security adviser Mike Waltz has introduced further instability to an already tumultuous national security landscape. The team has faced scrutiny due to the use of the Signal messaging app for discussing sensitive military operations, in addition to growing concerns over Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s leadership and the dismissal of the four-star general previously heading the National Security Agency.
This latest change comes at a time when the administration is grappling with several foreign policy challenges, including Iran’s accelerating nuclear program, trade tensions with China, and ongoing conflicts in regions like Gaza and Ukraine, which have proven difficult to resolve despite Trump’s initial claims of quick solutions.
Waltz’s exit also provides Trump an opportunity to consolidate foreign policy decision-making among a select, trusted group committed to his “America First” vision. Notable voices in this circle include special envoy Steve Witkoff and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who has been appointed as an interim replacement for Waltz while the latter is tapped to become the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.
William Banks, founding director of the Syracuse University Institute for Security Policy and Law, suggests that Trump may have achieved his goal of consolidating power, with few dissenting voices in his decision-making process. Despite past tensions during the 2016 presidential campaign, Rubio, once dubbed “Little Marco” by Trump, has adeptly aligned himself with Trump’s foreign policy, managing to steer clear of pitfalls that ensnared other national security leaders.
Waltz faced severe criticism earlier this year for including journalist Jeffrey Goldberg in a private encrypted chat used to discuss military operations in Yemen. Additionally, he was linked to a wing of the Republican Party that favored military interventions, now less popular in GOP circles. Waltz’s advocacy for diplomatically isolating Russia’s President Putin often conflicted with Trump’s ambiguous stance on the leader.
The Pentagon has been another source of disruption, with Hegseth conducting a series of dismissals in response to leaks, leading to vacancies in crucial military roles. His directive to remove online content celebrating diversity sparked public backlash, and his association with Elon Musk in receiving classified Pentagon briefings also stirred controversy.
Analyzing the current state of Trump’s national security team, experts like Daniel Fried, a former U.S. ambassador to Poland, highlighted concerns about internal coordination and decision-making. Fried, with his experience on the National Security Council under previous administrations, perceives the Trump team as lacking organization and consistency, suggesting that chaotic decision-making is no media illusion.
The role of the national security adviser, created in 1953, is vital for coordinated government functioning, responsible for information flow and policy development. However, Trump’s approach, often influenced by media over formal advisory, seems to minimize this role’s significance. Heather Conley, a former State Department deputy assistant secretary, notes that Trump tends to set foreign policy more autonomously.
Amidst these shifts, Trump reportedly considers advice from unorthodox figures like far-right activist Laura Loomer, who claims influence over recent high-profile military dismissals. Loomer reportedly suggested removing Mike Waltz, impacting the current leadership dynamics.
In comparison to his initial presidency, Trump appears to strive for an image of more stable administration. His first term saw significant turnover within his national security team and conflicts with officials resisting his directives. By removing a national security adviser misaligned with his views, Trump might be freeing himself from bureaucratic constraints he faced previously.
However, assigning Rubio dual roles in a sensitive foreign policy context could complicate matters as Trump navigates issues in Ukraine and Gaza, nuclear negotiations with Iran, and global trade challenges. Rubio’s recent media appearances have focused on current foreign policy issues rather than his expanded responsibilities, suggesting potential challenges in leadership clarity.
Fried expressed concern that unclear leadership could hamper strategic leverage, yielding an environment ripe for confusion and inaction.