White House Sidelines 160 NSC Staffers, Prioritizes Loyalty to Trump/ Newslooks/ WASHINGTON/ J. Mansour/ Morning Edition/ President Donald Trump’s administration has sidelined approximately 160 National Security Council (NSC) staffers, directing them to work remotely as the administration reviews staffing to align with Trump’s “America First” agenda. National Security Advisor Mike Waltz aims to create a leaner NSC staffed with personnel fully committed to Trump’s policies.
NSC Restructuring Under Trump: Quick Looks
- Staff Review: About 160 detailees sidelined while their roles undergo review.
- Focus on Alignment: Personnel must align with Trump’s “America First” priorities.
- Expertise at Risk: Moves could reduce institutional knowledge during global crises.
- Background Checks: Reports of staff being questioned about political loyalty and past social media activity.
- Historical Context: The NSC traditionally retains nonpartisan experts during transitions.
White House Sidelines 160 NSC Staffers, Prioritizes Loyalty to Trump
Deep Look
The Trump administration has initiated a major shake-up of the National Security Council (NSC), sidelining dozens of career detailees from federal agencies like the CIA, State Department, and FBI. The move is part of a broader effort by National Security Advisor Mike Waltz to realign the NSC with President Trump’s agenda and streamline operations.
Personnel Changes
The sidelined staff, referred to as detailees, have been directed to work remotely and remain on call for senior directors. This shift is part of a review aimed at creating a more efficient NSC staffed with individuals fully committed to Trump’s policies.
“It is entirely appropriate for Mr. Waltz to ensure NSC personnel are committed to implementing President Trump’s America First agenda,” said NSC spokesperson Brian Hughes.
Some detailees have already been informed that their assignments are ending, with plans to return them to their home agencies. For instance, several counterterrorism experts were sent back to their parent organizations this week.
Political Loyalty and Screening
Sources report that incoming Trump officials have questioned some NSC staff about their political affiliations, including voting records and social media history. This unprecedented vetting process raises concerns about potential political bias and the chilling effect on new hires.
Risks to Expertise
Critics warn that removing experienced staff could hinder the administration’s ability to address complex foreign policy challenges, such as the ongoing war in Ukraine and escalating tensions in the Middle East.
“Wholesale removal of career experts risks depriving the NSC of vital institutional knowledge at a critical time,” said one official familiar with the matter.
Historical Precedent
Since its creation during President Harry Truman’s administration, the NSC has served as a nonpartisan advisory body, retaining experts across party lines during presidential transitions. Biden’s National Security Advisor, Jake Sullivan, emphasized this tradition, calling career staffers “patriots” who serve without political bias.
However, Trump’s first term highlighted tensions between the administration and career officials. The 2019 impeachment proceedings against Trump were triggered by concerns raised by two NSC detailees over a call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
Waltz’s Vision for the NSC
Mike Waltz, a former Green Beret and congressman, has pledged to build a leaner, more focused NSC. He envisions a team aligned with Trump’s foreign policy goals and plans to bring back personnel from Trump’s first term who share his vision.
“We want 100 percent alignment with the president’s agenda,” Waltz said in a recent interview.
Global Context
The restructuring comes as the U.S. faces significant challenges on the global stage, including managing alliances, addressing conflicts, and responding to emerging threats. Critics argue that purging experienced staff for ideological reasons could undermine national security efforts.
You must Register or Login to post a comment.