In a major shift in U.S. foreign policy presence, the Trump administration is reportedly planning to shutter dozens of American embassies and consulates worldwide, including ten in Africa, Europe, and the Indian Ocean region. Among those targeted for permanent closure is the U.S. Embassy in Asmara, Eritrea.
A document obtained by Politico’s NatSec Daily reveals that the State Department’s undersecretary for management has recommended closing embassies in Eritrea, Grenada, Lesotho, the Central African Republic, Luxembourg, the Republic of Congo, Gambia, South Sudan, Malta, and the Maldives. Under the plan, diplomatic affairs for these countries would be handled by nearby embassies—Eritrea, for instance, would fall under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Embassy in Nairobi, Kenya.
The proposed downsizing forms part of a broader effort by the Trump administration to slash the State Department’s budget by nearly 50 percent. It also signals a significant reorientation of U.S. global engagement, with a focus on cost-cutting and strategic prioritization over traditional diplomatic outreach.
Critically, the document also outlines plans to drastically reduce the U.S. diplomatic footprint in two countries long central to U.S. counterterrorism operations: Somalia and Iraq. The administration is considering “working with the interagency to reduce or eliminate State’s footprint in Mogadishu,” and is proposing to shut down the costly Baghdad Diplomatic Support Center while significantly curtailing operations in both Baghdad and Erbil.
The State Department has not commented on the proposal, which is expected to draw both domestic and international scrutiny. The potential embassy closures—especially in geopolitically sensitive areas such as the Horn of Africa—raise questions about the future of U.S. diplomatic influence in regions where rivals like China, Russia, and the Gulf states have been expanding their reach.
In Eritrea’s case, the closure could further weaken already limited U.S.-Eritrea engagement and signals a broader disengagement from the Red Sea region—at a time when its strategic importance is rising.
Critics say the move reflects a retreat from global diplomacy in favor of a narrower, transactional approach to foreign policy, while supporters argue it is a necessary step to streamline government spending and focus on core strategic interests.
