Trump Plans Massive Embassy Closures Worldwide

The State Department is preparing to propose significant cuts to its global presence, including the complete closure of numerous embassies and consulates, according to a leaked internal memo obtained by Punchbowl News. The proposed budget for fiscal year 2026 outlines a plan to consolidate outposts in countries like Canada and Japan, and dramatically “resize” consulates in major cities, shifting them to a minimal operational model.

The evaluation process, detailed in the memo, considered factors such as regional feedback, consular workload, cost-effectiveness, facility condition, and security assessments. The plan, driven by the Trump administration’s goal of nearly halving the State Department’s budget, targets a total of $28.4 billion for the department and USAID – a staggering 48 percent reduction from the 2025 congressional allocation, representing a $27 billion cut.

Specifically, the proposal calls for the closure of ten embassies and seventeen consulates, impacting diplomatic operations in countries including Eritrea, Luxembourg, Malta, and South Sudan, with functions absorbed by neighboring embassies. Within Europe, five consulates in France and two in Germany are slated for closure, alongside operations in Edinburgh, Scotland, and Florence, Italy. Canadian consulates in Montreal and Halifax would be significantly downsized, offering limited on-the-ground support. U.S. missions to international organizations like the OECD and UNESCO would also be integrated into existing embassies and consulates.

The Baghdad Diplomatic Support Center in Iraq is also targeted for closure, cited as the most expensive State Department mission.

This proposed restructuring, while framed as a cost-saving measure, raises serious concerns about the long-term implications for U.S. diplomacy and influence abroad. While fiscal responsibility is important, drastically reducing the State Department’s capacity risks hindering vital diplomatic efforts, intelligence gathering, and the provision of essential services to American citizens overseas. A diminished diplomatic footprint could create vacuums that are filled by adversaries, potentially destabilizing regions and undermining U.S. national security interests. The scale of these proposed cuts appears to prioritize short-term budgetary gains over the sustained investment in diplomatic engagement that is crucial for navigating an increasingly complex and volatile world. It remains to be seen how Congress will respond to this ambitious, and potentially damaging, proposal.