The White House’s struggles to negotiate an off-ramp in Iran are a reminder of how crucial skilled diplomacy can be. Yet the State Department appears intent on purging and politicizing the ranks of the nation’s top envoys. Congress has a duty to push back.

Out of 195 ambassadorial postings around the world, more than 110 sat empty as of early March — including in countries as vital to U.S. interests as Germany and South Korea. Nearly three dozen of those openings were created after the administration abruptly recalled a slew of career diplomats at the end of last year. Traditionally, career foreign-service officers have occupied roughly two-thirds of available positions, with the rest handed out to political appointees. That proportion has now reversed. Worse: Only six out of the 75 ambassadors nominated by the president in his second term have been trained diplomats.

The risks of ignoring diplomatic expertise should be self-evident. Nuclear analysts have questioned whether war with Iran might’ve been averted if the administration had properly understood its initial offer and negotiating strategy. Meanwhile, recent political appointees have offended host governments from Poland to Chile with attacks on local politicians. In an interview with Tucker Carlson, U.S. Ambassador Mike Huckabee outraged America’s Arab allies by implying Israel should annex a huge swath of the Middle East. French authorities have summoned U.S. Ambassador Charles Kushner not once but twice to complain about interference in their domestic affairs.

Even if allies and adversaries understand that the current president is liable to upend policy at any moment, experienced ambassadors still serve an essential function. They can relay local knowledge and insight to inform policymaking in Washington. They can interpret administration actions and calm nerves in foreign capitals, cultivating support for U.S. policies and forestalling resistance. Above all, they can protect Americans abroad: Only four of the 12 U.S. embassies bordering or near Iran had ambassadors in place when war broke out, which helps explain the lack of an evacuation plan for civilians in the region.

If the White House continues down this path, America’s once-respected diplomatic corps could lose invaluable institutional knowledge and credibility. Boorish behavior will undermine U.S. partnerships and soft power, as happened to China after its own “wolf warrior” diplomats provoked a global backlash. Partisanship may start to infect the professional diplomatic corps — which for decades has promoted U.S. policies regardless of party — as officials angle for promotion. The more positions that are left vacant or assigned to donors and flatterers, the more gaps each new administration will have to fill when there’s a change in power.

The president has the right to appoint officials he trusts. But Congress also has an obligation to ensure the nation’s diplomatic service remains strong and capable. Legislators should press the White House to start nominating career diplomats to fill as many ambassadorships as possible, without asking for their partisan bona fides. Oversight committees should speed along the nominations of experienced diplomats while demanding that political appointees at least demonstrate a modicum of knowledge about their destination and due respect for local cultures and priorities. The career-versus-political balance should be shifted back toward the historical norm.

As long as the U.S. has global interests, it will need skilled diplomats to promote and protect them. Congress should ensure that network isn’t crippled from abuse or neglect.

____

The Editorial Board publishes the views of the editors across a range of national and global affairs.

©2026 Bloomberg L.P. Visit bloomberg.com/opinion. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.