{"id":11,"date":"2026-05-21T11:56:40","date_gmt":"2026-05-21T11:56:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/reliablemovingcrews.com\/?p=11"},"modified":"2026-05-21T11:56:40","modified_gmt":"2026-05-21T11:56:40","slug":"inside-the-unraveling-of-u-s-diplomacy-under-trump","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/reliablemovingcrews.com\/?p=11","title":{"rendered":"Inside the unraveling of U.S. diplomacy under Trump"},"content":{"rendered":"
LONDON – When Donald Trump warned Iran on April 7 that \u201ca whole civilization will die tonight,\u201d a European diplomat in Washington said his government wanted an urgent answer to a chilling question: Was the U.S. president contemplating the use of a nuclear weapon? <\/div>
Across Europe and Asia, the concern went beyond whether Trump\u2019s apocalyptic threat was real or bluster. One fear, the diplomat said, was that Russia could seize the moment to justify similar threats in Ukraine, triggering a nuclear crisis on two continents.<\/div>
European governments immediately sought reassurance through a traditional channel: the U.S. State Department. But according to the diplomat, officials there gave an unsettling response: They didn\u2019t know what Trump meant or what actions his words might portend.<\/div>
The previously unreported episode points to a historic breakdown in American diplomacy. At a moment when a uniquely unpredictable U.S. president is rattling markets and capitals with dramatic pronouncements, governments around the world are scrambling for clarity, only to discover that their usual points of contact \u2013 at U.S. embassies or inside Washington \u2013 are missing, mute or out of the loop. At least half of America\u2019s 195 ambassadorial posts worldwide are now vacant. <\/div>
Margaret MacMillan, an Oxford University professor of international history, said the Trump administration is eroding America\u2019s capacity to understand the world it operates in, raising the risk of global instability. \u201cWe\u2019re not going to be able to use diplomacy as we have often done before: to build relationships, get agreements that benefit both sides, and avert and end wars.\u201d<\/div>
The Trump administration rejects the notion of a breakdown, saying the changes have strengthened U.S. diplomacy and streamlined decision-making. \u201cThe President has the right to determine who represents the American people and interests around the world,\u201d said Tommy Pigott, a State Department spokesperson.<\/div>
This account of America\u2019s diplomatic upheaval is based on interviews with more than 50 senior diplomats, White House officials and recently retired ambassadors, as well as dozens of foreign officials, diplomats and lawmakers across Europe and Asia. <\/div>
As America\u2019s career diplomats are fired or sidelined, its allies are changing how they deal with Washington. Rather than rely on embassies or formal channels, foreign governments say they are rewiring their diplomacy around a small circle of people with direct access to the president, leaving many dependent on back channels to manage a superpower whose signals have grown erratic.<\/div>
Some U.S. allies now believe the most effective response to a volatile president is to treat his rhetoric as background noise.<\/div>
That calculus was evident after Trump\u2019s threat to annihilate Iran stoked fears of nuclear war. In response, officials in Britain, France and Germany drafted what one European diplomat called a \u201charsh\u201d joint statement later that day. But they chose not to release it, deciding Trump\u2019s language was bluster and a public rebuke could prompt him to continue the bombing. By evening, Trump had announced a two-week ceasefire with Iran. <\/div>
The British, French and German foreign ministries didn\u2019t reply to requests for comment. <\/div>
The episode, also previously unreported, illustrates an approach many allies now follow: restraint over confrontation. But diplomats said that repeatedly discounting Trump\u2019s threats is also dangerous because it might leave them unprepared when another crisis looms. <\/div>
More than a year into Trump\u2019s second term, influence and information are increasingly flowing through a handful of envoys. Most prominent: Trump\u2019s son-in-law Jared Kushner and the president\u2019s longtime friend, real estate developer Steve Witkoff. Kushner has no formal government title and Witkoff no prior diplomatic experience. But some foreign governments now prioritize communications with them over official channels, Reuters found. <\/div>
Kushner and Witkoff did not respond to requests for comment. <\/div>
Other countries have cultivated their own unconventional lines into the White House. South Korean officials bypassed U.S. trade negotiators to forge ties with White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles \u2013 a person they felt could explain Trump\u2019s true intentions as they fought back against his 25% tariffs. And Japan found an unlikely intermediary in SoftBank founder Masayoshi Son \u2013 one of Trump\u2019s golfing partners. <\/div>
The State Department was an early target in Trump\u2019s second term. In April 2025, Secretary of State Marco Rubio called it a \u201cbloated\u201d bureaucracy gripped by \u201cradical political ideology\u201d and announced a \u201ccomprehensive reorganization plan.\u201d The effort was foreshadowed in Project 2025, a policy blueprint published in 2023 by the Heritage Foundation, a right-wing think tank in Washington, D.C. The plan called for a leaner State Department with more political appointees and the removal of career ambassadors deemed hostile to the administration. <\/div>
About 3,000 employees left the State Department last year, nearly half fired and the rest taking buyouts \u2013 a roughly 15% cut to its U.S.-based staff. Then, in December, Rubio ordered the unprecedented recall of about 30 ambassadors worldwide. <\/div>
Rubio promised last year that his overhaul would \u201cempower the Department from the ground up, from the bureaus to the embassies.\u201d But today, 109 of the 195 U.S. ambassadorial posts worldwide are vacant, according to the American Foreign Service Association, the diplomats\u2019 union. <\/div>
A White House official said the changes \u201chave made our government more efficient and less bloated and more able to effectively execute the president\u2019s foreign policy.\u201d<\/div>
The new structure leaves Washington with fewer top diplomats on the ground in a major war zone. Five of the seven countries bordering Iran, and four of the six Gulf States, have no U.S. ambassador. <\/div>
Many U.S. embassies are now run by charg\u00e9s d\u2019affaires \u2013 diplomats who serve as acting heads \u2013 rather than Senate-confirmed ambassadors, which some countries regard as a diplomatic downgrade. Former U.S. ambassadors and State Department officials said the reduced diplomatic presence contributed to a chaotic scramble to evacuate Americans from the region when Trump started the Iran war.<\/div>
\u201cThose missions should all have ambassadors when you\u2019re fighting a war,\u201d said Barbara Leaf, a retired career diplomat who served as U.S. ambassador to the United Arab Emirates under the first Trump administration and as assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern Affairs under President Joe Biden. \u201cAt a moment of crisis \u2013 and it\u2019s an open-ended crisis \u2013 this administration has left these missions in a parlous state.\u201d<\/div>
Pigott said U.S. embassies have performed well during the Iran war and are \u201cmore than appropriately staffed.\u201d <\/div>

DIPLOMATIC PURGE <\/h3>
For Bridget Brink, the fracture between the Trump administration and its far-flung diplomats was potentially a matter of life and death.<\/div>
Brink was the U.S. ambassador to Kyiv when Trump returned to office. In March 2025, just days after Trump\u2019s explosive encounter with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy at the White House, the U.S. cut off military aid and intelligence sharing to Ukraine. The weapons included air defense munitions that helped protect not just Ukrainians but also U.S. embassy personnel from Russian drones and missiles, Brink said. <\/div>
\u201cI had 1,000 people, all civilians, on the ground,\u201d Brink said in an interview. \u201cAnd we were protected by Ukrainians using U.S. and other equipment.\u201d<\/div>
The halting of military aid came without warning, she said. \u201cWhen we tried to find out why it was stopped, we got no answer.\u201d Brink reached out to the Pentagon, the State Department and the White House \u2013 \u201ceverywhere that we could, because we were very concerned about what this meant not only for Ukrainians but also for our own security.\u201d The Pentagon did not respond to a Reuters request for comment on her account. <\/div>
Brink said her staff worked behind the scenes to persuade the Trump administration to resume the aid, which it agreed to do on March 11. But she said she never received official confirmation of why the aid was halted in the first place. <\/div>
Layoffs at the National Security Council, which traditionally coordinates foreign and defense policy at the White House, further frayed relations between the Trump administration and its embassies. In 2025, Trump slashed the NSC from hundreds of people to just a few dozen.<\/div>
For months, NSC staff held no regular meetings and faced a de facto ban on holding interagency meetings on national security and foreign policy, according to three current and former U.S. officials in Washington. The White House official said the NSC did not stop regular or interagency meetings but they were smaller and focused on Trump\u2019s priorities.<\/div>
During that period, multiple officials said, staffers received little formal guidance about major topics such as the Ukraine war or NATO\u2019s future. Instead, they scrutinized Trump\u2019s Truth Social account for policy signals. Many NSC staffers kept Trump\u2019s account open on a dedicated screen and responded quickly when he posted, the officials said.<\/div>
Under Biden, Brink had regularly joined NSC meetings to develop and coordinate complex wartime policy between Washington and the Kyiv embassy. Under Trump, those meetings stopped, Brink said. She was told instead to \u201cjust call people\u201d \u2013 an ad hoc approach she described as inefficient and unworkable in a conflict zone where Russian attacks were routine. \u201cWe\u2019re seven hours ahead and in the bunker almost every night.\u201d<\/div>
The final straw, she said, was Trump\u2019s policy of \u201cappeasement\u201d on Ukraine \u2013 seeking closer ties with President Vladimir Putin while blaming Ukraine for Russian aggression. She resigned in protest in April 2025. Two months later she announced she was running as a Democrat from Michigan for the U.S. House of Representatives.<\/div>
Her successor, Julie Davis, who served as charg\u00e9 d\u2019affaires, will also step down and retire in June, the State Department said on April 28. Department spokesperson Pigott said Davis is retiring after a \u201cdistinguished 30-year tenure\u201d in the foreign service. <\/div>
Many other career diplomats have had their ambassadorships abruptly cut short. A week before Christmas, about 30 were told to vacate their posts by mid-January \u2013 a recall that came largely without warning or explanation. Some departing ambassadors privately dubbed it \u201cthe Saturday Night Massacre,\u201d a Watergate-era phrase now used to describe mass firings of officials. <\/div>
U.S. ambassadors fall into two categories: career diplomats and political appointees. Both are nominated by the president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. Career diplomats traditionally pride themselves on being nonpartisan and often have decades of experience. Political appointees are usually major campaign donors, former lawmakers or close presidential allies, and may have little or no diplomatic background. <\/div>
In U.S. administrations spanning nearly 50 years, career diplomats have typically made up between 57% and 74% of ambassadors, according to the American Foreign Service Association. In Trump\u2019s second term, about 9% of his ambassadorial appointees are career diplomats \u2013 a dramatic decline in the institutional expertise that has historically guided U.S. diplomacy.<\/div>
Most of the ambassadors recalled in December were career diplomats who were appointed to their current posts under Biden but had also served Republican administrations, including Trump\u2019s. Ukraine envoy Brink, for instance, served five presidents, Democrat and Republican, including Trump in his first term.<\/div>
The State Department said the mass recall was a \u201cstandard process\u201d and that replacements would represent Trump and \u201cadvance the America First agenda,\u201d which the White House says will \u201cchampion core American interests.\u201d <\/div>
More than 100 ambassadorships remain open worldwide. \u201cWe are conducting our diplomacy with one arm tied behind our back,\u201d said Brian Nichols, an ambassador for Democratic and Republican presidents from 2014 to 2021, in Peru and Zimbabwe. <\/div>
Against that backdrop, a new pipeline of diplomats aligned with Trump\u2019s agenda is emerging. <\/div>
The Ben Franklin Fellowship, founded in 2024, identifies and seeks to promote conservatives within the State Department and counters what its leaders describe as bias against them. \u201cA lot of moderate officers come to us \u2013 men, white men \u2013 (and) they say, \u2018I\u2019m totally marginalized by DEI,\u2019\u201d said co-founder Phillip Linderman, referring to diversity, equity and inclusion programs under previous administrations. <\/div>
The group now lists about 95 fellows on its website, including Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau. Another 250 members, mostly active diplomats, conceal their identities to avoid retaliation under future Democratic administrations, said Linderman, a former diplomat.<\/div>
Among the fellowship\u2019s largest financial backers is the Heritage Foundation, the architect of Project 2025. Last year Heritage gave the group a $100,000 grant, effectively helping to advance one of Project 2025\u2019s main recommendations: to remake a workforce it views as hostile to conservative administrations. Heritage told Reuters it supported many U.S. organizations but exerted no \u201cdirect control\u201d over them.<\/div>
The fellowship aims to help Trump avoid appointing State Department staff who could obstruct his agenda, said Linderman and Matt Boyse, another ex-diplomat, fellowship co-founder and senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, a conservative think tank. The group convenes networking seminars, recruits on college campuses and advises the Trump administration on which career diplomats they see as ideological activists. \u201cWe\u2019re helping them know \u2013 if they want to know \u2013 if a person is part of the resistance,\u201d Boyse told Reuters.<\/div>
Eighteen former ambassadors expressed concern that Ben Franklin Fellowship members were being fast-tracked into senior roles ahead of more experienced people. Pigott said the State Department \u201cdoes not make personnel decisions based on participation in outside groups or demographic quotas.\u201d<\/div>

THE RISE OF THE ENVOY STATE<\/h3>
Trump has increasingly bypassed embassies, entrusting sensitive diplomacy to special envoys, most prominently Kushner and Witkoff, his principal negotiators on the wars in Ukraine, Gaza and Iran.<\/div>
In the lead\u2011up to the Iran war, Kushner and Witkoff met Iranian officials in Geneva in late February but didn\u2019t bring along U.S. nuclear specialists, according to European officials involved in the discussions. In the previous nine months, the Trump administration fired at least a half dozen Iran nuclear experts, including Nate Swanson, a career diplomat who worked on Iran issues across administrations. <\/div>
Swanson helped implement the Obama administration\u2019s 2015 nuclear accord with Iran. The highly technical document, in which Iran agreed to significantly limit its nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of nuclear-related economic sanctions, was drafted by large teams of diplomats and experts. Trump withdrew from the deal in 2018. Swanson said Witkoff called in April last year to ask him to rejoin renewed talks with Tehran. At the time, Swanson was working at the State Department\u2019s Office of Sanctions Coordination.<\/div>
Weeks went by, however, without meetings on Iran, Swanson said. \u201cHe had a ton on his plate,\u201d he said of Witkoff, who was also juggling talks over Ukraine and Gaza. \u201cWe just didn\u2019t have any input.\u201d Before long, Swanson said, the administration \u201cjust stopped asking for advice.\u201d <\/div>
Less than two months after joining Witkoff\u2019s negotiating team, Swanson was dismissed after the right-wing influencer Laura Loomer derided him on social media as an \u201cObama holdover.\u201d He has since joined the Atlantic Council think tank as a senior fellow. Loomer did not respond to a comment request from Reuters.<\/div>
One senior European diplomat said that during last-ditch talks in Geneva, the U.S. team struggled to grasp the significance of different uranium\u2011enrichment thresholds and other elements of Iran\u2019s nuclear program, forcing European officials to explain. \u201cHow can you negotiate when you don\u2019t understand the fundamentals?\u201d the diplomat said.<\/div>
On February 28, after the Geneva talks failed, the U.S. and Israel started bombing Iran. On that day, and again on March 3, Witkoff briefed reporters on the talks. Those briefings suggested he had misread Iran\u2019s proposal, exaggerating Iran\u2019s nuclear threat by conflating limited enrichment of uranium with its near\u2011term weaponization, said Kelsey Davenport of the Arms Control Association, a Washington, D.C.-based group that advocates for effective arms control policies. She reviewed recordings and transcripts from participants in the briefings.<\/div>
Davenport said Witkoff\u2019s statements contained many errors suggesting \u201ctechnical incompetence.\u201d For example, he referred to Iran\u2019s IR-6 uranium-enrichment centrifuge as \u201cprobably the most advanced centrifuge in the world,\u201d when it\u2019s not even the most advanced one in Iran. \u201cWitkoff does not need to be a nuclear expert to negotiate a good deal. But if he\u2019s not, he should be surrounded by people who are,\u201d she said.<\/div>
Trump\u2019s top two envoys have also faced scrutiny of their potential conflicts of interest by Democrats in the U.S. Congress \u2013 Kushner for allegedly negotiating peace deals with countries with which he has billion-dollar business deals, and Witkoff for his family\u2019s role in a Trump crypto firm seeking inroads in the Middle East. Both have denied any conflict of interest. <\/div>
The White House official called such claims \u201ca tired narrative\u201d pushed by Democrats and said both men \u201cfully understood\u201d Iran\u2019s proposals during negotiations.<\/div>
More than 90% of ambassadors appointed by Trump this term have been political loyalists, not career diplomats, and wield unusual power due to their perceived connections with the president\u2019s inner circle. Two European officials recalled how Kushner\u2019s father, Charles, the U.S. ambassador to France, underscored his proximity to power by calling Jared directly in front of foreign counterparts at a meeting last year.<\/div>
The U.S. embassy in Paris declined to comment.<\/div>
As his ambassador in Beijing, Trump appointed another loyalist: David Perdue, a former Georgia senator and businessman who has echoed Trump\u2019s false claims that the 2020 election was rigged. Three U.S. government officials who focus on China said Perdue has called Trump directly to hammer out decisions and address unresolved diplomatic questions, while even senior U.S. diplomats were cut out of the loop. In planning high-level visits, they said, embassy staff often waited until Perdue had phoned Trump before committing to final arrangements \u2013 a break from the past when such decisions were done at lower levels.<\/div>
Wolfgang Ischinger, a former German ambassador to Washington, said America\u2019s current approach reflects a dramatic concentration of power over U.S. foreign policy in one person: Trump. \u201cThat person will take decisions, sometimes overnight, sometimes in a formal meeting, sometimes not,\u201d he said. \u201cThat\u2019s very different, and I\u2019m not sure the Trump way of taking decisions actually offers a guarantee for good decisions.\u201d<\/div>
Some countries are forging unconventional routes into the White House. <\/div>
In April 2025, Trump announced a 25% tariff on South Korea, threatening its export\u2011driven economy. In subsequent trade talks, South Korean officials were struggling to determine whether their U.S. counterparts were accurately conveying Trump\u2019s position, Kang Hoon-sik, the presidential chief of staff, told a South Korean podcast. South Korean officials instead adapted by engaging directly with Wiles, the White House chief of staff. The arrangement was atypical. Kang is not the usual Korean counterpart facing the U.S. on foreign policy, security or trade, and Wiles is not a trade negotiator.<\/div>
The South Korean president\u2019s office and foreign ministry didn\u2019t reply to a request for comment.<\/div>
Japan turned to SoftBank founder and Trump golfing buddy Masayoshi Son. <\/div>
Shigeru Ishiba, who served as prime minister until October 2025, told Reuters that while he was leader, Japan used the tech tycoon as a back channel to reach Trump \u2013 the first time Son\u2019s role has been publicly acknowledged. Ishiba said Son was acting largely in his own business interests, but confirmed that his government passed messages to Trump through Son. <\/div>
Reaching Trump directly was vital because \u201cthe people around him are all yes-men,\u201d said Ishiba. <\/div>
SoftBank and Son declined to comment. Japan\u2019s foreign ministry denied using Son as a back channel, but declined to comment on whether Ishiba had done so.<\/div>
Pigott, the State spokesperson, said he \u201crejects the premise that key decisions were made without meaningful input from experienced professionals.\u201d He described Trump\u2019s use of envoys and direct lines to the White House by some countries as effective. \u201cThe sustained direct engagement from the highest levels of this administration around the world is an asset,\u201d he said, \u201cand anyone claiming otherwise doesn\u2019t know what they are talking about.\u201d<\/div>

THE WORLD RECALIBRATES<\/h3>
Trump has upended diplomatic norms with a steady stream of threats \u2013 aimed at foes such as Iran and allies including Denmark, Canada and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Governments have been forced to weigh whether responding publicly would calm tensions or make them worse.<\/div>
That\u2019s what happened in early April after Trump warned that Iran\u2019s civilization could be wiped out. Officials in Britain, France and Germany drafted what one European diplomat described as the \u201charsh\u201d joint statement \u2013 then decided against releasing it. <\/div>
\u201cWe thought in the end (that) every time he barks like that, he does not bite,\u201d said the diplomat, who helped draft the statement. European officials believed a U.S. ceasefire with Iran remained possible and worried that a public rebuke might push Trump to continue bombing. They held back. By the end of the day, Trump declared the ceasefire.<\/div>
The episode reinforced a lesson for many U.S. allies: Silence can be the safest response to Trump\u2019s most extreme threats. <\/div>
Some European diplomats call this the \u201cMerkel method,\u201d a nod to former German Chancellor Angela Merkel\u2019s stoic response during Trump\u2019s first term: absorb provocations without public reaction while firmly defending national interests.<\/div>
A handful of allies, including Australia and New Zealand, did criticize Trump\u2019s Iran remarks. But some others, including Japan, held their tongues. <\/div>
\u201cPresident Trump\u2019s statements changed constantly, so over time we stopped reacting to each one,\u201d said Takeshi Iwaya, a lawmaker with Japan\u2019s ruling Liberal Democratic Party who served as foreign minister until October 2025. \u201cReacting can just provoke unnecessary responses.\u201d<\/div>