The White House has moved to sharply reduce the size of the National Security Council, eliminating more than 100 positions in a restructuring that has prompted debate among former officials and national security analysts over whether a smaller staff can keep pace with an increasingly unpredictable global environment.

Roughly half of the NSC’s workforce — which previously numbered about 350 people — is being cut as part of what administration officials describe as an effort to streamline an organization they say has grown unnecessarily large over time. Critics of the council’s past structure argue it became heavily populated with career bureaucrats whose priorities often diverged from those of the president.

Many of the staff members affected by the changes were detailed to the NSC from other federal agencies, including the State Department and the Pentagon. Those individuals are now being returned to their original departments. Political appointees who were placed on administrative leave during the transition have been told they will be reassigned elsewhere within the administration.

While the administration maintains that the downsizing will improve efficiency and sharpen decision-making, some former NSC officials caution that the impact of the shake-up remains uncertain. They argue it will take time to determine whether the restructuring results in a more agile organization or leaves the president without sufficient institutional support during fast-moving crises.

Behind the scenes, some national security insiders speculate that Secretary of State Marco Rubio — who is currently serving as interim national security advisor — may be deliberately shrinking the council to reduce internal competition and bureaucratic infighting before returning full-time to his role at the State Department.

Michael Allen, a former senior director at the NSC, suggested the changes reflect President Donald Trump’s longstanding preference for maintaining tighter personal control over major foreign policy decisions.

According to Allen, the president favors a process in which options and recommendations reach his desk earlier, rather than being filtered through layers of interagency deliberation. In his view, a smaller NSC aligns with that leadership style.

The restructuring follows a turbulent period for the council. The sudden departure of National Security Advisor Mike Waltz earlier this year, after a private Signal chat was inadvertently made public, destabilized the organization. His deputy, Alex Wong, also exited soon afterward, leaving key leadership gaps.

Friday’s personnel overhaul removed several influential figures who had been central to shaping the administration’s early foreign policy. Among them was Eric Trager, the senior director for Middle East affairs, who had worked closely with U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff on sensitive negotiations with Iran. Andrew Peek, the senior director for Europe and Eurasia, also departed after playing a key role in developing the administration’s strategy toward the Russia-Ukraine war.

At the same time, the restructuring elevated several trusted aides into more prominent positions. Andy Barker, previously serving as national security advisor to Vice President J.D. Vance, and Robert Gabriel, an assistant to the president for policy, are expected to assume new roles as deputy national security advisors.

Former Trump administration official Victoria Coates argued that frequent turnover within the NSC is not unusual and should not be viewed as inherently destabilizing. She noted that during President Ronald Reagan’s two terms, the White House cycled through multiple national security advisers and even relied on acting advisers at times.

Coates added that President Trump has understandable concerns about the NSC, shaped in part by his experiences during his first term and compounded by recent missteps. She described the Signal messaging incident involving Waltz as a serious problem and said the president is taking steps to rebuild trust in the institution.

With a leaner National Security Council, President Trump is expected to rely more heavily on a small group of senior officials to deliver intelligence and policy recommendations. Chief among them are Secretary of State Marco Rubio, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who are likely to play expanded roles in briefing the president.

Brian Katulis, a former NSC official and current analyst at the Middle East Institute, said the administration’s approach reflects a highly centralized decision-making model.

In his assessment, the president and a tight inner circle dominate national security policy, leaving less room for the kind of extensive interagency coordination that characterized previous administrations. While Katulis does not believe the restructuring will result in major intelligence gaps, he warned that reduced coordination could pose challenges.

Rather than missing information, he said, the greater risk is that different agencies may pursue overlapping or conflicting strategies without a robust mechanism to ensure alignment.

As the administration continues to reshape the NSC, the long-term effects of the overhaul remain unclear. Supporters see a more disciplined, president-focused system taking shape, while critics worry that trimming too deeply could leave the White House vulnerable during moments of global crisis.