The Trump administration is reportedly considering significant cuts to the United States’ diplomatic presence abroad, as evidenced by an internal document from the State Department that has been made available to CNN. This document outlines potential plans to close nearly 30 overseas embassies and consulates, a move that reflects a broader strategy aimed at overhauling the U.S. diplomatic agency. The motivation behind these proposed changes appears to be the administration’s ongoing efforts to streamline government operations and reduce federal expenditures.
Notably, the internal document recommends shrinking the diplomatic footprints in critical regions such as Somalia and Iraq, which have long been pivotal to U.S. counterterrorism operations. The term “resizing” is used to describe adjustments to other diplomatic outposts, hinting at a re-imagined strategy for American diplomacy that may not prioritize maintaining as many physical locations as previously thought necessary.
One significant aspect of this recommendation is the expected involvement of Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Currently, it remains unclear if he has officially approved these significant cuts. The potential closure of these embassies and consulates is seen as a direct result of initiatives championed by the Department of Government Efficiency, which is reportedly supported by prominent entrepreneurs like Elon Musk. This partnership aims to enact substantial changes within the federal landscape, reallocating resources and possibly prioritizing more strategic diplomatic missions.
According to the document, the proposed closures include 10 embassies and 17 consulates, with numerous locations listed from regions such as Europe and Africa, extending even into parts of Asia and the Caribbean. Among the embassies slated for closure are those located in Malta, Luxembourg, Lesotho, the Republic of Congo, the Central African Republic, and South Sudan. The document also outlines plans to shut down several consulates, specifically mentioning five in France, two in Germany, and additional establishments in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the United Kingdom, South Africa, and South Korea.
For functional continuity, the recommendations entail that the responsibilities of the closed embassies would be transferred to neighboring diplomatic missions. This adjustment raises concerns about the level of service and support that may be offered to constituents of the United States residing abroad, particularly given the vital role embassies and consulates play in processing visas, offering assistance to Americans in distress, and gathering essential intelligence to inform U.S. policy.
So far, the administration has only proposed ambassadorial candidates for two of the embassies marked for closure—those in Malta and Luxembourg. This limited nomination process may signal a lack of urgency or a potentially divided focus within the administration regarding these closures. Earlier this year, CNN discussed the State Department’s plans to close some of the consulates detailed in the document, indicating that discussions surrounding these actions are not new but rather part of an ongoing evaluation of U.S. diplomatic strategies.
As embassies and consulates are critical for fostering international relationships and facilitating administrative tasks, the implications of such actions could be far-reaching. They serve not only as physical representation of U.S. interests but also as vital conduits for diplomacy, which is particularly important in countering influence from other nations like China.
Lastly, the recommendations for resizing operations suggest that missions in Japan and Canada could serve as templates for consolidating resources and support staff into larger operations. This may lead to the establishment of “FLEX-style light footprint posts” prioritizing a limited focus and staffing availability. Additionally, the need for “dual-hatted leadership” within multi-mission posts suggests an era of efficiency that could redefine how U.S. diplomatic efforts are structured in the future, particularly in high-stakes cities like Paris, where institutions like the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and UNESCO are located.