As Allies Recalculate, Australia’s Ambassador Exit Signals Growing Unease With Trump’s America

WASHINGTON — When Australia announced that its ambassador to the United States, Kevin Rudd, would step down months earlier than expected, officials in both countries emphasized continuity. The move, they said, reflected a routine transition: Mr. Rudd would become president and chief executive of the Asia Society, and Canberra would appoint a successor in due course.

But in diplomatic circles, the departure was widely read as something more — a subtle but telling signal of how strained relations with Donald Trump have become, not just for Australia but for many of America’s closest partners.

Mr. Rudd’s tenure in Washington had been marked by an unusually public tension with the president, culminating in an awkward exchange during an Oval Office meeting last October, when Mr. Trump responded to a question about past criticism by telling the ambassador, “I don’t like you either, and I probably never will.” The remark, delivered in front of cameras, ricocheted across Australian and American media and reinforced a growing perception abroad: that Washington under Mr. Trump is an unpredictable and often inhospitable place for allies.

A Departure That Resonated

Officially, Mr. Rudd’s four-year appointment, which began in 2023, was not scheduled to end until next year. Yet his decision to leave at the end of March has drawn outsized attention because of who he is and what he represents.

Mr. Rudd is no ordinary diplomat. A Mandarin-speaking former prime minister who served two nonconsecutive terms, he has long been regarded as one of Australia’s most experienced hands on the United States and China. His appointment was initially welcomed in Washington as a sign that Canberra wanted a steady, sophisticated presence at a time of rising tensions in the Indo-Pacific.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese praised Mr. Rudd’s work in a statement announcing the transition, crediting him with delivering “concrete outcomes for Australia during both Democrat and Republican administrations in collaboration with our closest security ally and principal strategic partner.”

Yet the emphasis on bipartisanship underscored the challenge: under Mr. Trump, even long-standing alliances have become entangled in personal grievances and public rebukes.

Personal Style, Diplomatic Cost

Mr. Trump has long treated diplomacy less as an exercise in institutional continuity than as a series of personal transactions. Allies who flatter him are praised; those who criticize him — even years earlier — can find themselves frozen out.

Mr. Rudd learned that firsthand. Before becoming ambassador, he had described Mr. Trump on social media as “the most destructive president in history,” comments he later deleted after Mr. Trump’s reelection in 2024. The deletions did little to soften the president’s view. In interviews, Mr. Trump dismissed the ambassador as “a little bit nasty” and “not the brightest bulb.”

Such language might once have been confined to campaign rallies. Now it is part of the texture of U.S. foreign relations — and it has consequences.

“Ambassadors rely on access and trust,” said a former U.S. diplomat who served in the Asia-Pacific region. “When a president personalizes disputes to this degree, it doesn’t just affect one relationship. It sends a message to every capital watching.”

Australia Watching From Afar

That message has not gone unnoticed in Australia, where public opinion toward Mr. Trump has long been skeptical. Polling conducted by Australian media outlets since the 2024 U.S. election shows majorities expressing unease about his leadership style and his approach to alliances.

In television segments aired by Australian Broadcasting Corporation, commentators have openly questioned whether the United States can still be relied upon as a stabilizing force. Clips circulating widely on X and TikTok show Australians booing the U.S. national anthem at sporting events and expressing anxiety about upcoming global events, including the Olympics, that will unfold under heightened geopolitical strain.

For Australian businesses and tourism operators, the concerns are not abstract. Similar to what has been reported along the U.S.-Canada border, some Australian travel agencies have noted a softening of demand for trips to the United States, citing political uncertainty and fears of hostile treatment at the border — a trend amplified by anecdotal accounts shared on social media.

A Broader Pattern Among Allies

Australia is not alone. Across Europe and Asia, Mr. Trump’s return to office has prompted quiet recalibration.

Vice President J.D. Vance has drawn criticism during overseas visits for lecturing European governments about embracing more right-wing policies, remarks that several diplomats described privately as tone-deaf. In Canada, business owners and tourism officials have spoken openly about cancellations tied to anger over Mr. Trump’s rhetoric toward Ottawa.

In this context, Mr. Rudd’s move to the Asia Society — an influential forum for dialogue on U.S.-Asia relations — appears less like a retreat than a repositioning. From New York, he will remain a prominent voice shaping conversations about China, regional security and America’s role in the world, but without the daily friction of representing his country inside a Trump White House.

Isolationism and Its Limits

At the heart of the unease is a fundamental concern about isolationism. Mr. Trump has repeatedly argued that allies take advantage of the United States and that American power should be wielded more unilaterally. Yet economists and foreign policy analysts note that modern America is deeply interdependent — reliant on trade, supply chains and diplomatic partnerships that cannot be turned on and off at will.

The consequences of strained relationships have already surfaced, from agricultural markets rattled by trade disputes with China to multinational companies reconsidering investment amid geopolitical volatility. Critics argue that alienating allies only compounds those risks.

“America cannot function as an island,” said a former senior official at the State Department. “When ambassadors start leaving early, when leaders choose to work around Washington rather than through it, that’s not strength. It’s erosion.”

A Warning, Not a Break

To be clear, Australia is not abandoning its alliance with the United States. Defense cooperation continues, intelligence sharing remains robust, and officials on both sides emphasize shared strategic interests in the Indo-Pacific.

But diplomacy is often about signals as much as substance. And Mr. Rudd’s early exit has been interpreted by many as a warning — that even the closest partners have limits to how much volatility they will absorb.

For Mr. Trump, who prides himself on dominance and personal leverage, the risk is that such departures accumulate quietly, until Washington finds itself increasingly alone in rooms it once led.

From the outside looking in, as one Australian commentator put it on social media, “America still matters enormously — but it looks less like a partner and more like a problem.”

That perception, diplomats say, may prove harder to reverse than any single clash in the Oval Office.