logo
The Administration Takes a Hatchet to the NSC

The Administration Takes a Hatchet to the NSC

Yahoo28-05-2025
At 4:20 p.m. on the Friday before Memorial Day, Brian McCormack, the National Security Council chief of staff, sent an email to more than 100 staffers telling them that they had 30 minutes to clear out their desk. Nearly all were people the Trump administration had hired to the NSC.
President Donald Trump has been gunning for the NSC since 2019, during his first term in office, when two staffers filed a whistleblower complaint about his call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and got him impeached. On Friday, White House officials told Axios that the NSC is plagued by unnecessary committees and meetings that slow down decision making, and that the council is a needless check on the president's power. One official called the NSC 'the ultimate Deep State. It's Marco vs. the Deep State. We're gutting the Deep State.'
That is a very strange way to characterize the arm of the government that exists to make sure the others are carrying out the president's agenda. In dismantling the NSC, Trump is not only removing part of his government's brain but creating real risk should a crisis strike. That's because the council has two core functions based in congressional statute: One is to advise the president on national security and foreign policy, and the other is to coordinate the work of agencies and departments in executing the policies he chooses.
So why do Trump officials think the NSC staff is unnecessary or harmful? The one quoted by Axios went on to say: 'If you have officials fighting each other and their agencies always involved in turf wars, you maybe need this process. That's not what you have here. Rubio, Bessent, Hegseth, Bondi—all of them know each other and like each other, and they know they're there to execute the president's will.'
[Read: Inside the fiasco at the National Security Council]
It is nice to hear that Trump officials all get along, and that the rumors to the contrary are false. But the point of the NSC process is not simply to resolve clashes of personality. I served in the NSC for almost three years under President Joe Biden, as the head of the strategic-planning directorate, and I had a bird's-eye view of the entire bureaucratic process.
No one loves committees, but that doesn't mean they're unnecessary. In a typical week, a committee of deputy Cabinet secretaries meets two or three times in the Situation Room, to discuss issues of the highest priority to the president. No phones or electronic devices are allowed. Lower-level committees meet to prepare groundwork. Occasionally, if significant differences emerge among departments, Cabinet officials will meet—imagine the Houthi-strike Signal group, but in a classified space, with real preparation.
This doesn't involve as many people as you might think. The NSC policy staff stood at 186 at the end of Biden's term, larger than in Trump's first term but smaller than under George W. Bush or Barack Obama. These people are spread across about 20 different directorates, and drawn from across the government. Some directorates are charged with covering different regions or specific issues: technology, energy, intelligence, defense. Most of the people let go on Friday were career civil servants working in these directorates.
The White House briefings implied that these people were the tools of the 'deep state,' sent to slow down the decision-making process and work against the president from the inside. But no one is sent to the NSC in that sense. The president and his national security adviser appoint the council's senior directors. These political appointees then pick directors to work on their teams—usually civil servants with the type of expertise and skills they believe the president will need to implement his agenda. The directorates often take the president's overarching ideas and convert them into nuts-and-bolts policy: AUKUS (the pact with Australia and the U.K. on nuclear-powered submarines), key elements of the CHIPS Act (which invested in the domestic manufacturing of semiconductors), the effort to roll back China's overseas bases, and the technology-export controls on China all originated in the NSC.
The NSC is a crucial tool for the president in a moment of crisis. Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, for example, called for a policy response spanning much of the U.S. government. The Biden administration's policy mobilized sanctions, weapons, diplomacy, and intelligence cooperation; it required coordination or communication with Europe, China, the Middle East, Congress, and the press. To make all of this happen, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan met daily with senior NSC staffers, not only to solve immediate problems, but also to figure out what more could be done to advance the president's objectives. The NSC was behind the move to get Ukraine sufficient numbers of air-defense missiles; it came up with an inventive scheme to generate funds for Ukraine out of Russian sovereign assets without seizing them outright; and it recommended the strategic declassification of intelligence to pressure Russia.
Trump, of course, could use his NSC to advance very different goals than Biden did. That's as it should be. But he has opted instead to divest himself of this tool. He has a few senior directors left—an unspecified number were fired on Friday, and others have been let go over the past couple of months—and each oversees a massive portfolio. The Europe directorate alone covers about 50 countries, including Russia and Turkey. These senior directors are now largely on their own. They have hardly anyone to draft policy guidance, review speeches, or be the first point of contact for embassies.
Those who oppose Trump may welcome these cuts, precisely because they reduce the ability of this president to destroy and remake U.S. foreign policy. Decimating the NSC removes a layer of White House oversight from the departments engaged in foreign affairs, which could mean strengthening them relative to Trump: If Rubio is truly a temporary national security adviser, there for just six months, the gutting of the NSC will weaken his successor and strengthen his influence as secretary of state. The Pentagon, Treasury Department, Department of Homeland Security, Central Intelligence Agency, and other agencies could likewise set up their own mini–foreign policies, each based on the Cabinet secretary's interpretation of what they heard from the president, whether in a meeting, a side conversation, or a Truth Social post.
Not only would this produce a chaotic and likely ineffective U.S. foreign policy, but the administration could run into some serious trouble with contingency planning. The NSC staff normally flags things that could go wrong and pulls together high-level working groups called 'tiger teams' to prepare plans for worst-case scenarios. The Biden administration ran tiger teams for Ukraine, various Taiwan scenarios, and a widening of the war in the Middle East. At least one looming crisis now deserves that type of attention.
[Read: Inside the fight over Trump's foreign policy]
On April 1 and 2, China carried out a maritime exercise called Strait-Thunder 2025A, for a quarantine of Taiwan and attacks on its military installations. Senior officials in the U.S. and allied nations saw this as a clear warning that China may be preparing a major action short of an invasion against Taiwan. It could, for example, impose a customs zone on Taiwan, whereby Beijing would control everything going in and out of it. The United States depends on Taiwan for semiconductor chips vital to the AI race—something the Trump administration is particularly concerned abou—and a quarantine or customs zone would wreak havoc with that.
In any other administration, the NSC would run a tiger team for such an eventuality. Two senior directors would convene senior officials from all departments and the military, who would then come up with options for deterring China from taking any such action, for making sure the U.S. gets advance notice if China does act, and for responding in a manner that would frustrate China's effort. The team would consider sanctions, diplomacy, and military options. It would scrutinize the plans of the departments. Deputies and principals would then discuss the tiger team's plan and make adjustments. If China struck, America would be as ready as it could be.
The kind of coordination the NSC provides, whether in anticipating crises or responding to them, does not happen automatically, even when Cabinet officials get along with one another. And no single department or agency can replace the NSC's role, because none has a sufficient overview of the whole field, or of all the tools the U.S. government can bring to bear. If one department did take the lead over all the others, it would likely be biased in favor of using the tools it controls and advancing its institutional interests.
Trump seems to think that he doesn't need any of this, that he knows what to do in any circumstance and doesn't need 'options' and 'recommendations' served up to him. In his mind, he just needs a small team to carry out his orders. But if China makes a move against Taiwan, especially if it is novel and unexpected, Trump may find himself asking what choices he has. If the plans have not been prepared, he will not be able to choose among them. Instead, the country will be dangerously exposed, relying solely on the president's gut instinct on a subject he knows little about.
Article originally published at The Atlantic
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump Donor Pleads Guilty to Bilking People Who Wanted Access and Visas
Trump Donor Pleads Guilty to Bilking People Who Wanted Access and Visas

New York Times

timea few seconds ago

  • New York Times

Trump Donor Pleads Guilty to Bilking People Who Wanted Access and Visas

In June 2017, a Republican donor posed for a photo with President Trump and Melania Trump at a ritzy dinner supporting his re-election at the Trump International Hotel in Washington. Admission cost $35,000 per plate. The donor did not come alone. According to federal prosecutors, the donor, Sherry Xue Li, had arranged for a dozen foreigners to attend alongside her, charging them each more than $90,000, including admission to the soiree. Foreigners cannot make campaign contributions, but she nonetheless passed the money along to the fund-raiser's organizers and used the photo, prosecutors said, to raise even more from unwitting investors who thought they were buying into an educational institute. She spent the money on more contributions — and herself. The dinner was a small part of a nearly decadelong scheme in which Ms. Li, along with her business partner, Lianbo Wang, solicited more than $30 million from roughly 150 foreigners who thought they were investing in the educational institute. In exchange, the donors were promised political access and a pathway to citizenship. Ms. Li, who has given hundreds of thousands of dollars to Republicans and Republican causes, pleaded guilty on Wednesday to money laundering conspiracy and conspiracy to defraud the United States. Mr. Wang had pleaded guilty to related charges in 2024 and was sentenced to five years in prison. Ms. Li 'attempted to corrupt a fundamental institution in this country — fair and transparent elections free from unlawful foreign influence,' Joseph Nocella Jr., the interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York, said in a news release. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

Colorado Congressmen Joe Neguse, Jason Crow part of lawsuit against Trump administration over ICE facility access
Colorado Congressmen Joe Neguse, Jason Crow part of lawsuit against Trump administration over ICE facility access

CBS News

timea few seconds ago

  • CBS News

Colorado Congressmen Joe Neguse, Jason Crow part of lawsuit against Trump administration over ICE facility access

Colorado Congressmen Joe Neguse and Jason Crow are among a dozen Democratic members of Congress filing a lawsuit against President Trump's administration, claiming a new policy is obstructing congressional oversight of Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities. The lawsuit claims that the administration is preventing members of Congress from accessing information and conducting visits to ensure the Department of Homeland Security is complying with federal law. They say this policy includes a seven-day waiting period and restrictions on visiting detention sites, which violates a federal law allowing them access without prior notice. On July 20, Crow, who represents Colorado's 6th Congressional District, said he was denied entry into the ICE detention facility in Aurora. The complaint says, "As part of its campaign of mass deportation, the Trump-Vance administration has stretched the U.S. immigration detention system far beyond its capacity. More people are being held by the United States in immigration detention than ever before, with many facilities housing more individuals than they were built to contain." Representatives cited many concerns as the reason for needed oversight, including overcrowding, sanitation, lack of medical care, mistreatment and lack of access to counsel. In two statements released after Crow's visit, ICE said requests need to be made with enough advanced notice to prevent interference in the President's Article II authority to oversee executive department functions. They suggested that a week would be enough notice and that the security protocols were for the safety of the staff and detainees. "Blocking Members of Congress from oversight visits to ICE facilities that house or otherwise detain immigrants clearly violates Federal law—and the Trump administration knows it," said Neguse, the U.S. House Assistant Minority Leader who represents Colorado's 2nd Congressional District. "Such blatant disregard for both the law and the constitutional order by the Trump administration warrants a serious and decisive response, which is why I'm proud to lead the lawsuit we proceeded with earlier today." The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, demands that the administration comply with the law. Neguse is one of a dozen representatives who are part of the lawsuit who argue that blocking Congress hinders accountability and threatens democracy. "Today, I filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration after they illegally denied me access into a federal immigration detention facility," said Crow. "Oversight is a fundamental responsibility of Congress. Under law, Members of Congress have the right to do unannounced oversight visits of federal immigration detention facilities. Since President Trump was elected, this administration has denied Members of Congress access to immigration detention facilities and tried to intimidate us from doing our jobs. I will not be deterred from conducting lawful oversight, and I'll continue fighting to hold the administration accountable, including in Congress and the courts." Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin released the following statement about the lawsuit: "These Members of Congress could have just scheduled a tour; instead, they're running to court to drive clicks and fundraising emails. "Here are the facts. As ICE law enforcement have seen a surge in assaults, disruptions, and obstructions to enforcement - including by Member of Congress themselves - any requests to tour processing centers and field offices must be approved by the Secretary of Homeland Security. These requests must be part of legitimate congressional oversight activities. ICE officers have seen an 830% surge in assaults. "As for visits to detention facilities, requests should be made with sufficient time to prevent interference with the President's Article II authority to oversee executive department functions-a week is sufficient to ensure no intrusion on the President's constitutional authority. To protect the President's Article II authority, any request to shorten that time must be approved by the Secretary."

Trump Targets Copper With Tariffs, Though Not as Aggressively as Expected
Trump Targets Copper With Tariffs, Though Not as Aggressively as Expected

New York Times

timea few seconds ago

  • New York Times

Trump Targets Copper With Tariffs, Though Not as Aggressively as Expected

President Trump signed an executive order Wednesday imposing a 50 percent tariff on imports of certain products made with copper, a move that he said would shore up American production of a metal that is important for national security. The order, which will take effect Friday, was not as broad as anticipated, and it stopped short of imposing new tariffs on raw copper. The announcement sent U.S. copper prices plummeting by nearly 20 percent on Wednesday afternoon, as investors reversed their bets that more expansive tariffs would send the cost of the highly traded metal skyrocketing. The tariffs will apply to copper pipes, wires, rods, sheets and tubes, as well as certain products made with copper, including pipe fittings, cables, connectors and electrical components, the White House said. The levies are likely to raise costs for domestic industries that rely on those products, including manufacturers and home builders. The executive order also contained a notable use of the Defense Production Act, a Korean War-era law that allows the government to intervene in the economy for national security purposes. Under that authority, the Trump administration will require a quarter of copper scrap produced in the United States to be sold within the country, rather than exported. It will also require a certain proportion of inputs that are needed to make copper, like copper ore, concentrates, cathodes and anodes, to be sold domestically rather than abroad. That proportion will start at 25 percent in 2027, increasing to 40 percent in 2029. The White House said that the moves — an unusual intervention by the government into a private market — would help ensure a low-cost supply of scrap and materials for domestic refiners that are trying to expand their operations. Note: As of 3:30 p.m. Eastern time Wednesday Source: FactSet By The New York Times Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store