In a bold move that’s shaking up the national security landscape, the Trump administration has kicked off a sweeping overhaul of the White House National Security Council (NSC). The restructuring, launched on Friday, is aimed at slimming down the bloated staff, tightening control, and surrounding the president with loyal aides who share his vision for foreign policy.
According to insiders, the changes are nothing short of dramatic. The NSC, once home to around 300 personnel, is being cut down to about 150, with multiple committees being scrapped. Most of those affected are officials temporarily assigned from agencies like the Pentagon and the State Department—and now they’re being sent back where they came from.
But the staffing cut is just the surface. The real shift is happening at the top. Andy Baker, the vice president’s national security adviser, and Robert Gabriel, a longtime Trump policy hand, have both been elevated to serve as deputy national security advisers. These two aren’t just any bureaucrats—they’re trusted insiders, known for their close ties to JD Vance and Trump himself.
This is the first major shake-up since Donald Trump removed Mike Waltz as national security adviser and gave the reins to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who now holds both roles. That move raised eyebrows, but the latest changes make the message clear: the NSC is no longer about broad policy debates—it's about executing Trump’s agenda with precision and loyalty.
People familiar with the changes say this is a break from the NSC’s old-school way of doing things. Traditionally, staffers shaped national security recommendations from the ground up, passing them through layer after layer of review. Now, that playbook’s out the window. With Baker and Gabriel in charge, the focus is on delivering results, not debating ideas.
For those inside the administration, this shake-up feels long overdue. Since Waltz’s departure, the NSC had been drifting, lacking a clear direction—especially when it came to hot-button issues like the Russia-Ukraine war. Waltz wanted to hit Vladimir Putin with severe sanctions if he refused to accept a peace deal pushed by Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff. But that clashed with Trump’s and Vance’s preference to de-escalate tensions and restore ties with Moscow.
Now, with Vance’s top adviser embedded in NSC leadership, those internal battles may finally be over. The team is expected to move forward with a strategy that reflects the president’s instincts—less confrontation, more control.
And if the changes feel sudden, that’s because they were. Brian McCormack, the NSC’s chief of staff, sent out the official word via email at 4:20 p.m. on the Friday before Memorial Day weekend—a classic move for major announcements that aren’t meant to make headlines. As a result, some of the reshuffling and dismissals are expected to spill into the following week.
Several senior officials are on their way out. Among them: Alex Wong, Waltz’s right-hand man; Eric Trager, who was in charge of Middle East policy; Andrew Peek, who led efforts in Europe; and members of the NSC communications team. It’s a clear house-cleaning effort that paves the way for Trump’s loyalists to take full control.
All of this comes just weeks after Waltz’s departure, which was itself mired in controversy—most notably his mistake of accidentally adding a journalist to a secure group chat on Signal that discussed sensitive missile strikes in Yemen before they happened.
In the end, what’s happening isn’t just a personnel shuffle—it’s a total redesign of how the NSC works. Gone is the sprawling think tank. In its place: a lean, execution-focused machine, directly aligned with Trump’s foreign policy, and run by people who don’t just advise the president—they speak his language.
Description:
"The Trump administration launches a major overhaul of the White House National Security Council (NSC), slashing staff, restructuring leadership, and aligning national security policy with the president’s agenda. Get the full story on the bold changes, key personnel shifts, and their impact on U.S. foreign policy."