Nearly five months into President’s second term, the United States still lacks a United Nations ambassador, despite the critical role of geopolitics.

After Elise Stefanik withdrew her nomination in late March due to concerns about Republicans potentially losing her New York seat in a special election, Trump nominated former National Security Advisor .

His confirmation process appears to be progressing slowly. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee, responsible for voting on the nomination before a full Senate vote, only confirmed receipt of the nomination on Thursday.

This first step in Waltz’s nomination occurred more than 45 days after its initial announcement, despite earlier comments to Digital stating, “The committee has been working at a historically fast pace and this nomination will be a priority moving forward.”

However, on Monday, the committee could not confirm when Waltz’s hearing and subsequent vote would occur.

When Digital inquired about the delay in confirming receipt of the nomination, the committee referred questions about the timeline to the White House.

The White House has not yet responded to Digital’s inquiries regarding the reason for the delay, especially considering that other nominations, such as that of , were expedited within five days of Trump taking office.

While the absence of a is not necessarily “dangerous,” it diminishes the U.S.’s ability to influence significant geopolitical events at a time when the nation faces some of its most pressing multifaceted geopolitical challenges since World War II.

“There are diplomatic disadvantages to not having senior leadership and supporting political staff in New York. It reduces U.S. influence and its capacity to negotiate at the highest level with other missions and the Secretariat,” Brett Schaefer, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute specializing in multilateral treaties and international organizations like the U.N., told Digital.

Schaefer clarified that although the U.S. lacks a Senate-approved official at the U.N., the administration still has representatives at U.N. headquarters in New York working to advance U.S. interests.

As a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council, the U.S. retains its position and veto power, applicable in major geopolitical policy decisions, such as the use of .

Although the U.S. has representation in case of an , such as the one initiated by Iran over the weekend following Israel’s military strikes on Thursday night, the ambassador is perceived as having direct access to the president, making them more influential diplomatically within the top international body.

“The United Nations is a serious arena, whether you agree with it or not,” said Jonathan Wachtel, who served as counsel to the U.S. permanent representative to the United Nations during the previous Trump administration. He added that while there are arguments for reform and policy changes, “ultimately, it’s a focal point for every conflict in the world, and it’s crucial to have U.S. representation at the world body.”

Wachtel emphasized that with numerous global conflicts, whether the U.S. is directly involved or not, including Russia’s war in Ukraine, Israel’s conflict against Iran and in Gaza, and broader issues like global hunger, Washington needs to assert its voice, or its adversaries will take advantage.

“[There’s] simply too much happening globally and too much to address,” Wachtel added. “And instead of the U.S. voice being heard [at the U.N.], the press corps and diplomats will be more attentive to the arguments of our adversaries, frankly speaking.”

Diana Stancy contributed to this report.