[By Guancha Observer, Ruan Jiaqi]
This week, National Security Advisor Hults was abruptly dismissed. The general consensus is that the "group chat leak scandal" cost him his career, but the reasons behind it seem to go beyond this.
According to a report by The Washington Post on March 3rd, even before the "group chat scandal" came to light, during Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's visit to the U.S. in early February, Hults took it upon himself to closely and deeply coordinate with Netanyahu regarding military actions against Iran. Afterward, Hults continued to promote Netanyahu's views, believing that the time was ripe for striking Iran. These actions had already infuriated his boss, Trump.
According to multiple senior U.S. officials and Trump advisors, Hults was a key figure in the White House who leaned toward military intervention and was more enthusiastic about using military force than Trump. This "overreach" undoubtedly angered Trump, who, during his second term, demanded great loyalty from his subordinates.
One of the informed sources said bluntly, "This reached Trump, and the president was very unhappy." He said, "Without fully considering diplomatic solutions, Hults tried to steer U.S. policy in a direction that made Trump uneasy."
The sources claimed that as early as during the initial stages of the Trump administration, Hults had several intense conflicts with other senior officials over his stance on Iran. Some within the U.S. government believed that Hults was trying to push the situation toward a path of military action and was closely collaborating with Israel.
Given this, it’s not hard to understand why Hults was fired and marginalized. Speaking of this matter, an advisor to Trump said, "If (James Baker, Secretary of State under President George H.W. Bush) had privately struck a deal with the Saudis to overturn President George H.W. Bush's policies, he would have been fired. You can't do that. You work for your own country's president, not another country's president."
According to U.S. media reports, Hults' spokesperson did not respond to requests for comment. Netanyahu's office issued a statement on Saturday, confirming that he met with Hults before meeting Trump during his visit to the U.S. in February, but denied having "frequent contact" with him.
White House Communications Director Steven Zhang took the opportunity to praise Trump in his response. Vaguely, he said, "The president sets the agenda, and his administration is responsible for implementing these policies. Everyone is working towards the same goal, which is why he has achieved the most successful accomplishments in history during his first 100 days in office."
President Trump's National Security Advisor, Hults, ABC
The Washington Post reported that from the start, Hults' appointment as national security advisor was an unexpected decision. Although loyal to Trump, his foreign policy inclinations were quite tough. On the Russia issue, he advocated taking a hard line against Putin. In contrast, Trump adopted a more conciliatory attitude toward Moscow and Tehran and sent a close friend, Witkov, as an envoy to seek an agreement.
After Trump planted seeds of dissatisfaction with Hults, two senior White House officials revealed that some important members of the Trump administration had once tried to help Hults, such as Vice President Vance.
In March, shortly after the "group chat leak scandal," Vance took Hults to Greenland, Denmark, where Trump had long hoped the U.S. could "acquire" the island. Vance also attempted to introduce Hults to other conservative figures aligned with his camp.
However, this ultimately failed to change Hults' fate of being dismissed. Chief of Staff (also known as the White House Chief of Staff) Susie Wells' changing attitude toward him was a clear signal. Reports said that over time, the president's "gatekeeper" and many other senior White House staff increasingly felt that Hults had significant differences with Trump in terms of working style and ideology, making it difficult to form an effective partnership.
Even before the "group chat scandal" happened, some White House officials had already thought that Hults would be one of the earliest Trump senior advisors to be replaced, with the "group chat scandal" possibly just being the last straw that broke the camel's back.
On May 1st local time, Trump announced on his self-created social media platform "Truth Social" that he would nominate Hults as the next U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations, while Secretary of State Rubio would temporarily serve as Acting National Security Advisor.
Although Trump's decision seemed to be a "transfer" for Hults and the wording was mild, Vance further described it as a "promotion," various media outlets, including POLITICO and the Financial Times, mentioned words like "dismissal" and "removal." POLITICO cited two informed sources and someone close to the White House, stating that discussions about the replacement candidate in the West Wing had been ongoing for weeks, but the specific plan to remove Hults only accelerated recently.
The Washington Post further pointed out that in terms of foreign policy, during his second term, Trump hired many ardent supporters of the "Make America Great Again" (MAGA) movement as key officials instead of traditional Republicans from his first term. This week's personnel changes in the National Security Advisor position are another manifestation of this trend: not only did it marginalize a key advisor who was not entirely loyal to his policies, but by appointing Rubio as the temporary replacement, it substantially weakened the decision-making influence of the National Security Council.
U.S. media quoted informed sources saying that Rubio, like Hults, came from the Republican establishment, but Rubio was more willing to abandon his usual stance and become a powerful spokesman for Trump. For example, on the Ukraine-Russia conflict, after taking office, Rubio abandoned his previous hardline stance on Russia and threatened to withdraw from the Ukraine-Russia negotiations, pressuring Kyiv.
Meanwhile, holding multiple positions meant that Rubio might not have the energy to manage the White House National Security Council, potentially turning this department, which plays a crucial role in shaping the president's foreign policy, into one that serves Trump personally rather than serving the White House as a critical department.
Many experts believe that for a U.S. president like Trump, who deeply questions traditional notions of world affairs, a National Security Council composed of mid-to-senior policy experts may not be a key structure he relies on.
A senior White House official joked that when Trump finally decided to transfer Hults this week, he referred to his most trusted advisor—himself.
"Of course, people will give their opinions. But decisions like this ultimately come down to him," he added.
This article is an exclusive piece by the Guancha Observer and cannot be reprinted without permission.
Original source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7500405587298009640/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author, and you are welcome to express your attitude by clicking the "like/dislike" button below.