Trump Aims to Reduce the State Department’s Scope, Size, and Influence
The proposed strategy includes a reduction in the number of embassies, a decrease in initiatives aimed at fostering international goodwill, and an increased emphasis on prioritizing U.S. interests.
TroibNews 
President Donald Trump is advocating for a significant reduction of the State Department, proposing fewer diplomats, a reduced number of embassies, and a narrowed focus that critics argue could benefit China on the global stage.
The Trump administration, supported by figures like Elon Musk and his associates, appears intent on redirecting the department's efforts towards transactional government agreements, enhancing U.S. security, and attracting foreign investments to America. This shift would involve cutting back or eliminating divisions that promote traditional soft power initiatives—such as those that advance democracy, defend human rights, support scientific endeavors, or generally foster international goodwill.
Such changes would represent a historic overhaul of the State Department, whose roles and responsibilities have expanded over time to encompass various efforts aimed at strengthening American influence internationally. This includes assisting nations in defending critical networks from cyber threats and advocating for the rights of individuals with disabilities.
Some of these proposed reforms have been indicated in public statements and orders from Trump and others in his administration. Further details regarding the strategy and specific cuts were shared with PMG by an individual familiar with internal State Department discussions and a former official affiliated with the Trump administration. Private documents reviewed by PMG also shed light on the evolving plans. Multiple individuals were afforded anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the topics discussed.
Proponents argue that the proposed changes would create a more streamlined yet adaptable Foreign Service that would serve U.S. interests more effectively.
“Substantial changes at the State Department are necessary to cut down on the bloated federal bureaucracy,” stated Sen. James Risch, chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He added that he had “personally experienced the challenges of an unresponsive and dismissive State Department.”
Conversely, critics warn that the reforms could have damaging long-term effects for the U.S., particularly as it competes with an increasingly assertive China. In recent years, China has outpaced the U.S. in the number of diplomatic facilities globally, thereby expanding its foreign influence while America's presence diminishes.
Tom Shannon, a former senior State Department official who served under both Republican and Democratic administrations, cautioned that the Trump administration is “going to dramatically shrink the ambit of American diplomacy, dramatically shrink the purpose and the practice of our diplomacy and return it, if not to the 19th century, at least pre-World War II.”
While the exact number of embassies slated for closure remains uncertain, Secretary of State Marco Rubio is on board with cutting a substantial number, according to the insider source.
The State Department's Executive Secretariat has tasked the Defense Department, CIA, Justice Department, and Department of Homeland Security, among others, to prioritize U.S. embassies based on their relevance to their operations, as revealed by a State Department official familiar with the request. This official and another from the department noted that the Pentagon has instructed combatant commands worldwide to compile their respective lists.
According to one official, the agencies are expected to score embassies on a scale of zero to ten, with a requirement that a quarter of the embassies in each region receive scores between zero and two, another quarter scores from three to five, and half can fall within the six to ten range. The scoring criteria will consider aspects like overall budget allocation for the embassy's presence, including facility maintenance, as well as the embassy's importance to the respective agency or department's policy objectives.
PMG also acquired a list of potential consulates that may be cut, including those in Rennes, Lyon, Strasbourg, and Bordeaux in France; Dusseldorf, Leipzig, and Hamburg in Germany; Florence, Italy; Ponta Delgada, Portugal; and Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Closing embassies presents greater complexity than shuttering consulates, particularly because many embassies also serve as hubs for other branches of the U.S. government, encompassing trade and agriculture offices. If implemented, the changes could lead to multiple countries being overseen by single embassies, a scenario already observed in regions like the Caribbean.
Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, which is spearheading efforts to downsize the federal workforce, is leading the planning for these initiatives. Furthermore, Trump has issued executive orders indicating the forthcoming changes for the State Department, initiatives that extend beyond plans to absorb the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).
Insights into the Trump administration’s foreign policy priorities can be gleaned from its strategy to dismantle USAID. The Department of Government Efficiency has significantly curtailed programs that foster good governance, democracy, education, and broader economic development while maintaining some that focus on health and emergency humanitarian aid, based on emails, spreadsheets, and other documents reviewed by PMG. A legal challenge to the USAID funding cuts is expected to be evaluated by the Supreme Court.
The cuts to USAID suggest that the State Department's bureau dedicated to human rights and democracy may face reductions or outright elimination.
Trump's restrictive immigration policies further indicate that the bureau handling migration and refugee matters could also be reduced or entirely eliminated.
If the current trajectory continues, other State bureaus at risk could include the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, the Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations, and the Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs. The latter may encounter skepticism regarding its climate-related work, as such initiatives do not align with Trump’s priorities.
According to the informed party, the economic affairs bureau is likely to be preserved due to Trump's transactional worldview and interest in attracting foreign investment to the U.S.
The consular affairs division, responsible for managing tasks like visas, passports, and assisting Americans abroad, is expected to remain an essential part of the State Department, although staffing reductions are anticipated.
James Hewitt, a spokesperson for the White House National Security Council, defended the planned changes at the State Department by referencing the country’s substantial debt. “Well, we are $36 trillion in debt,” he remarked.
The State Department press office stated that it is aligning its efforts with presidential directives on “workforce optimization” while assessing its “global posture to ensure we are best positioned to address modern challenges on behalf of the American people.”
Many of the State-related proposals are still in early stages, especially in light of ongoing court challenges to the Department of Government Efficiency’s sweeping authority. Certain significant components of the State Department are mandated by legislation, complicating potential restructuring efforts. Additionally, the specifics, such as the precise number of embassies slated for closure, may fluctuate as discussions progress and practicalities present challenges.
Any diplomatic outposts and initiatives that survive the proposed cuts are likely to be managed by a significantly reduced number of staff. As previously reported by PMG, Rubio supports a cut of at least 20 percent in the State Department's workforce. Ambassadors stationed abroad have been asked to compile data on their personnel in anticipation of forthcoming reductions, which multiple U.S. diplomats have confirmed to PMG. The department has suspended or canceled some Foreign Service examinations in relation to Trump's sweeping hiring freeze across the federal government, leaving the timeline for onboarding new U.S. diplomats uncertain.
Approximately two-thirds of the State Department’s estimated 75,000 personnel are local hires assisting U.S. missions overseas. These foreign nationals can be more easily dismissed compared to U.S. civil and Foreign Service officers, who enjoy more legal protections; however, all groups are expected to face some cuts, according to the informed source. Rubio is anticipated to announce soon that several hundred employees deemed to be on probation will be let go, as per two State Department officials acquainted with the strategies.
Earlier this month, Trump issued an executive order calling for “reforms in recruiting, performance, evaluation, and retention standards” for the Foreign Service. These changes aim to overhaul the Foreign Affairs Manual and other foundational elements of U.S. diplomacy.
The executive order appears to be geared towards creating a more compliant body of State Department employees who can be dismissed with greater ease.
A former senior State Department official cautioned that this approach might discourage diplomats from voicing dissenting opinions, either through routine analytical work at embassies or via the formal “Dissent Channel,” which allows for direct communication of differing views to the Secretary of State. The absence of dissenting perspectives could impair the decision-making capabilities of high-ranking U.S. officials, the former official noted.
Across the government, including within the State Department, staff and offices focused on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) are facing cuts. The impact of the anti-DEI stance on special envoy offices at State, such as those advocating for disability rights or women's issues, remains uncertain.
Nonetheless, the proliferation of special envoy offices in recent years—often spurred by congressional mandates—suggests that these entities may see overall reductions.
There’s also a possibility that the administration may permit certain bureaus or offices to remain theoretically intact while leaving key positions vacant.
“Even statutory departments and functions have significant room for discretionary cuts to staffing and budgets,” noted the informed individual.
Despite these efforts, the Trump administration may encounter difficulties in rehiring staff if it realizes the need to restore slashed programs in the future.
“They’re taking a lot of steps now that are going to be pretty hard to reverse engineer,” warned a former Biden administration official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity due to concerns about potential retaliation from the Trump administration.
Eric Bazail-Eimil contributed to this report.
James del Carmen contributed to this report for TROIB News
The Trump administration, supported by figures like Elon Musk and his associates, appears intent on redirecting the department's efforts towards transactional government agreements, enhancing U.S. security, and attracting foreign investments to America. This shift would involve cutting back or eliminating divisions that promote traditional soft power initiatives—such as those that advance democracy, defend human rights, support scientific endeavors, or generally foster international goodwill.
Such changes would represent a historic overhaul of the State Department, whose roles and responsibilities have expanded over time to encompass various efforts aimed at strengthening American influence internationally. This includes assisting nations in defending critical networks from cyber threats and advocating for the rights of individuals with disabilities.
Some of these proposed reforms have been indicated in public statements and orders from Trump and others in his administration. Further details regarding the strategy and specific cuts were shared with PMG by an individual familiar with internal State Department discussions and a former official affiliated with the Trump administration. Private documents reviewed by PMG also shed light on the evolving plans. Multiple individuals were afforded anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the topics discussed.
Proponents argue that the proposed changes would create a more streamlined yet adaptable Foreign Service that would serve U.S. interests more effectively.
“Substantial changes at the State Department are necessary to cut down on the bloated federal bureaucracy,” stated Sen. James Risch, chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He added that he had “personally experienced the challenges of an unresponsive and dismissive State Department.”
Conversely, critics warn that the reforms could have damaging long-term effects for the U.S., particularly as it competes with an increasingly assertive China. In recent years, China has outpaced the U.S. in the number of diplomatic facilities globally, thereby expanding its foreign influence while America's presence diminishes.
Tom Shannon, a former senior State Department official who served under both Republican and Democratic administrations, cautioned that the Trump administration is “going to dramatically shrink the ambit of American diplomacy, dramatically shrink the purpose and the practice of our diplomacy and return it, if not to the 19th century, at least pre-World War II.”
While the exact number of embassies slated for closure remains uncertain, Secretary of State Marco Rubio is on board with cutting a substantial number, according to the insider source.
The State Department's Executive Secretariat has tasked the Defense Department, CIA, Justice Department, and Department of Homeland Security, among others, to prioritize U.S. embassies based on their relevance to their operations, as revealed by a State Department official familiar with the request. This official and another from the department noted that the Pentagon has instructed combatant commands worldwide to compile their respective lists.
According to one official, the agencies are expected to score embassies on a scale of zero to ten, with a requirement that a quarter of the embassies in each region receive scores between zero and two, another quarter scores from three to five, and half can fall within the six to ten range. The scoring criteria will consider aspects like overall budget allocation for the embassy's presence, including facility maintenance, as well as the embassy's importance to the respective agency or department's policy objectives.
PMG also acquired a list of potential consulates that may be cut, including those in Rennes, Lyon, Strasbourg, and Bordeaux in France; Dusseldorf, Leipzig, and Hamburg in Germany; Florence, Italy; Ponta Delgada, Portugal; and Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Closing embassies presents greater complexity than shuttering consulates, particularly because many embassies also serve as hubs for other branches of the U.S. government, encompassing trade and agriculture offices. If implemented, the changes could lead to multiple countries being overseen by single embassies, a scenario already observed in regions like the Caribbean.
Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, which is spearheading efforts to downsize the federal workforce, is leading the planning for these initiatives. Furthermore, Trump has issued executive orders indicating the forthcoming changes for the State Department, initiatives that extend beyond plans to absorb the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).
Insights into the Trump administration’s foreign policy priorities can be gleaned from its strategy to dismantle USAID. The Department of Government Efficiency has significantly curtailed programs that foster good governance, democracy, education, and broader economic development while maintaining some that focus on health and emergency humanitarian aid, based on emails, spreadsheets, and other documents reviewed by PMG. A legal challenge to the USAID funding cuts is expected to be evaluated by the Supreme Court.
The cuts to USAID suggest that the State Department's bureau dedicated to human rights and democracy may face reductions or outright elimination.
Trump's restrictive immigration policies further indicate that the bureau handling migration and refugee matters could also be reduced or entirely eliminated.
If the current trajectory continues, other State bureaus at risk could include the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, the Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations, and the Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs. The latter may encounter skepticism regarding its climate-related work, as such initiatives do not align with Trump’s priorities.
According to the informed party, the economic affairs bureau is likely to be preserved due to Trump's transactional worldview and interest in attracting foreign investment to the U.S.
The consular affairs division, responsible for managing tasks like visas, passports, and assisting Americans abroad, is expected to remain an essential part of the State Department, although staffing reductions are anticipated.
James Hewitt, a spokesperson for the White House National Security Council, defended the planned changes at the State Department by referencing the country’s substantial debt. “Well, we are $36 trillion in debt,” he remarked.
The State Department press office stated that it is aligning its efforts with presidential directives on “workforce optimization” while assessing its “global posture to ensure we are best positioned to address modern challenges on behalf of the American people.”
Many of the State-related proposals are still in early stages, especially in light of ongoing court challenges to the Department of Government Efficiency’s sweeping authority. Certain significant components of the State Department are mandated by legislation, complicating potential restructuring efforts. Additionally, the specifics, such as the precise number of embassies slated for closure, may fluctuate as discussions progress and practicalities present challenges.
Any diplomatic outposts and initiatives that survive the proposed cuts are likely to be managed by a significantly reduced number of staff. As previously reported by PMG, Rubio supports a cut of at least 20 percent in the State Department's workforce. Ambassadors stationed abroad have been asked to compile data on their personnel in anticipation of forthcoming reductions, which multiple U.S. diplomats have confirmed to PMG. The department has suspended or canceled some Foreign Service examinations in relation to Trump's sweeping hiring freeze across the federal government, leaving the timeline for onboarding new U.S. diplomats uncertain.
Approximately two-thirds of the State Department’s estimated 75,000 personnel are local hires assisting U.S. missions overseas. These foreign nationals can be more easily dismissed compared to U.S. civil and Foreign Service officers, who enjoy more legal protections; however, all groups are expected to face some cuts, according to the informed source. Rubio is anticipated to announce soon that several hundred employees deemed to be on probation will be let go, as per two State Department officials acquainted with the strategies.
Earlier this month, Trump issued an executive order calling for “reforms in recruiting, performance, evaluation, and retention standards” for the Foreign Service. These changes aim to overhaul the Foreign Affairs Manual and other foundational elements of U.S. diplomacy.
The executive order appears to be geared towards creating a more compliant body of State Department employees who can be dismissed with greater ease.
A former senior State Department official cautioned that this approach might discourage diplomats from voicing dissenting opinions, either through routine analytical work at embassies or via the formal “Dissent Channel,” which allows for direct communication of differing views to the Secretary of State. The absence of dissenting perspectives could impair the decision-making capabilities of high-ranking U.S. officials, the former official noted.
Across the government, including within the State Department, staff and offices focused on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) are facing cuts. The impact of the anti-DEI stance on special envoy offices at State, such as those advocating for disability rights or women's issues, remains uncertain.
Nonetheless, the proliferation of special envoy offices in recent years—often spurred by congressional mandates—suggests that these entities may see overall reductions.
There’s also a possibility that the administration may permit certain bureaus or offices to remain theoretically intact while leaving key positions vacant.
“Even statutory departments and functions have significant room for discretionary cuts to staffing and budgets,” noted the informed individual.
Despite these efforts, the Trump administration may encounter difficulties in rehiring staff if it realizes the need to restore slashed programs in the future.
“They’re taking a lot of steps now that are going to be pretty hard to reverse engineer,” warned a former Biden administration official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity due to concerns about potential retaliation from the Trump administration.
Eric Bazail-Eimil contributed to this report.
James del Carmen contributed to this report for TROIB News
