Follow us on social

google cta
Mike Waltz

Reports: Trump fires embattled hawk Mike Waltz from White House

News sources say the head of the National Security Council and members of his staff have been sacked, likely due to Signalgate imbroglio

Reporting | QiOSK
google cta
google cta

Update 5/1, 3:30PM: President Donald Trump says he is nominating Mike Waltz, who is being taken out of his role as National Security Advisor, for U.S Ambassador to the UN. More on that from Axios.


Breaking news reports say Mike Waltz is out as National Security Council (NSC) advisor, as well as his colleague, principal deputy national security advisor Alex Wong.

The former congressman has been embroiled in scandal since assuming the post, most notably the “Signalgate” debacle, where he and other top officials discussed Yemen war plans in a group chat on messaging application Signal — which included the Atlantic’s Editor in Chief Jeffrey Goldberg.

The stormclouds have been building for some time: indeed, the Atlantic’s Isaac Stanley-Becker told Wolf Blitzer two days ago on CNN that Waltz was on "thin ice,” especially because of his role in “Signalgate.” Waltz had apparently added Goldberg to the chat in a phone mishap.

As the morning news broke across social media, word was that U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff would be first in line for Waltz's replacement.

Experts tell RS that the officials’ ouster, depending on their replacements, may provide opportunities for a more restrained foreign policy during Trump’s second round in the Oval Office.

“Waltz and Wong were among the more hawkish of Trump’s close advisors, especially on issues related to Iran and China, including U.S. policy toward Taiwan,” said Jennifer Kavanagh, Senior Fellow and Director of Military Analysis at Defense Priorities.

“At many points, both Waltz and Wong have seemed out of sync with President Trump, who very clearly wants to avoid a war with Iran and is seemingly less committed to defending Taiwan militarily than past presidents," she added. "While much depends on who takes their place, the removal of Waltz and Wong opens the door for replacements that share Trump’s preferences for military restraint and diplomacy.”

“Before he was cheerleading the unconstitutional use of the U.S. military, Waltz was one of the most anti-China members of Congress, asserting that the U.S. was already in a Cold War with Beijing,” Dr. Annelle Sheline, Research Fellow in the Middle East program at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, told Responsible Statecraft.

“His positions generally reflected a neoconservative approach to foreign policy; his selection as NatSec Advisor had raised questions about how he would gel with a president who had pledged to keep the U.S. out of unnecessary wars. His ouster may signal an opportunity for more deal-making and less saber rattling,” Sheline added.

"Now that Waltz is on the way out, it is possible that the Trump administration might back away from some of the most extreme demands that they have been making in the in direct talks with Iran," writer Dan Larison offered. "However, it is unlikely that there will be any major policy shifts.Trump’s remaining national security team is still very hawkish, as shown by the Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s threats against Iran this week."

Replacements pending, it seems Waltz and Wong may not be the only Trump administration officials on the chopping block: as Fox Senior White House Correspondent Jacqui Heinrich wrote on X, “additional names [are] likely to come.”

Larison called the Witkoff prospect "a very odd choice in some respects because of Witkoff’s lack of foreign policy and government experience," he said.

"Appointing Witkoff could be a sign that the president is pulling back from the more aggressive foreign policy positions that he took in the first three months, or it could simply mean that the president wants to fill the position with one of his friends."


Top photo credit: National Security Advisor Mike Waltz (Phil Pasquini/Shutterstock)
google cta
Reporting | QiOSK
Oil disruption from Iran war won’t end any time soon
REUTERS/Essam al-Sudani/File Photo

People walk near farmland by the Zubair oil field as gas flares rise in the distance, in Zubair Mishrif, Basra, Iraq, amid regional tensions following the recent disruption to shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and the U.S.-Israeli conflict with Iran, March 9, 2026.

Oil disruption from Iran war won’t end any time soon

QiOSK

The US-Israel-Iran war has led to extraordinary volatility in global energy markets this week, and there is little reason to think that it will abate any time soon.

Benchmark Brent crude, which traded below $60 per barrel early this year, jumped to $80 last Thursday. It then bounced to $120 in thin weekend markets and, as of this writing, has settled in around $92. In other words, the range of the recent oil price has been 50% of where it was a mere five days ago.

keep readingShow less
Dan Caine
Top photo credit: Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff U.S. Air Force Gen. Dan Caine conduct a press briefing on Operation Epic Fury at the Pentagon, Washington, D.C., March 4, 2026. (DoW photo by U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Alexander Kubitza)

Did Caine just announce the Morgenthau option for Iran?

QiOSK

Gen. Dan Caine’s formulation of American war aims in Iran is remarkable not because it is bellicose, but because it is strategically incoherent.

In a press conference Tuesday morning, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff did not describe a limited campaign to suppress missile fire, blunt Iran’s naval threat, or even impose a severe but bounded setback on Tehran’s coercive instruments. He described a campaign against Iran’s “military and industrial base” designed to prevent the regime from attacking Americans, U.S. interests, and regional partners “for years to come.” In an earlier briefing he put the objective similarly: to prevent Iran from projecting power outside its borders. Rather than the language of a discrete coercive operation, this describes a war against a state’s capacity to regenerate power.

keep readingShow less
Ilham Aliyev azerbaijan iran
Top photo credit: Azerbaijan president Ilham Aliyev visited Embassy of Islamic Republic of Iran, offered condolences over death of former President Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, in 2017. (Office of the President of Azerbaijan/public domain)

Neocons wanted an Azeri uprising against Iran. They didn't get it.

Middle East

With Iran resisting the U.S./Israeli onslaught for the second week, what was supposed to be a quick transition to a pro-U.S. regime following the decapitation strike that killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is fast turning into a quagmire. While the U.S. and Israel continue to sow mayhem on Tehran from the skies, the previously unthinkable option of sending ground troops to Iran is gaining ground.

First, an apparent plan was being hatched to employ Kurdish fighters to take on Tehran. Then, when drones, allegedly flying from Iran although Tehran denied it, struck the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic of Azerbaijan — hitting an airport terminal and a village school, and wounding four civilians — the stage appeared set for the opening of a northern front against Iran. Here was an alleged act of aggression from Iranian territory against Israel's closest partner in the South Caucasus. It offered the pretext to goad Azerbaijan into joining the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.