The National Security Council Is Missing in Action

Why It Matters

Without a functional NSC, the United States lacks a unified, expert‑driven framework to assess and manage the escalating Iran conflict, increasing strategic missteps and economic fallout.

Key Takeaways

• Trump cut NSC staff by 50%, now 150 members.
• NSC absent from Iran war decision‑making process.
• Inconsistent war rationale fuels diplomatic and market uncertainty.
• Lack of coordinated assessment risks costly military escalation.

Pulse Analysis

The National Security Council has long served as the president’s central hub for integrating diplomatic, defense, and intelligence perspectives. From Eisenhower’s formalized structure to Kennedy’s secretive crisis meetings, the NSC historically ensured that major foreign‑policy actions were vetted by senior officials and subject‑matter experts. This institutional memory and cross‑agency collaboration have been credited with averting miscalculations during the Cuban Missile Crisis and shaping the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement, underscoring the council’s role as an essential check on unilateral decision‑making.

Under President Trump, the NSC was dramatically downsized in May 2025, cutting its staff by half to about 150 personnel and shifting senior intelligence and military leaders to a situational rather than permanent presence. The restructuring, coupled with a broader push to streamline national intelligence under Secretary of State Marco Rubio, has left the council peripheral to the Iran war’s strategic planning. President Trump’s public statements have oscillated between threats of Iranian missile attacks and vague justifications for bombing, while the intelligence community, represented by DNI Tulsi Gabbard, was conspicuously excluded from the core deliberations. This vacuum has eroded the systematic review process that the Deputies Committee traditionally provides.

The absence of a coordinated NSC framework carries tangible risks for U.S. security and the global economy. Unchecked escalation could drive oil prices upward, inflating American gasoline costs and straining household budgets. Moreover, without rigorous inter‑agency analysis, the United States may commit to costly military operations—potentially involving hundreds of thousands of troops and billions in expenditures—without clear objectives or exit strategies. Restoring a fully staffed, empowered NSC could re‑establish disciplined oversight, improve threat assessments, and ultimately safeguard both American lives and financial stability.