How to Interpret the New Version of the U.S. National Security Strategy Report

By Xinhua News Agency reporter Xu Jianmei

The White House released the U.S. National Security Strategy report late on the 4th. The report focuses on America's "core national interests," emphasizes Western Hemisphere priority, sharply criticizes Europe, downplays the threat of terrorism, strives to maintain intense but manageable major-power competition in the Asia-Pacific region, and seeks to rebalance external commitments with internal capabilities.

What new strategies are proposed in this 33-page report? How will the U.S. adjust its global military presence? What does it reveal about the Trump administration's views on security and the world?

Asserting the "Right to Intervene" in Latin America

In 1823, U.S. President Monroe put forward the "Monroe Doctrine," warning European powers against involvement in American affairs. This new version of the National Security Strategy report for the first time proposes the "Trump Corollary" to the Monroe Doctrine, stating that the U.S. will "assert and execute the 'Trump Corollary' as a modern version of the Monroe Doctrine" to establish U.S. primacy in the Western Hemisphere.

The report describes the Western Hemisphere as the "front line" for U.S. border security, critical supply chains, and geopolitical competition. The objectives of the "Trump Corollary" include: preventing and curbing large-scale migration flows; "using lethal force when necessary" against drug cartels; preventing "foreign hostile forces" from controlling key assets in the Western Hemisphere; "ensuring the U.S. continues to enjoy access to key strategic locations"; strengthening military deployments in Latin America; establishing or expanding access at strategically significant sites; and linking aid and trade to relations with Latin American countries.

Analysts believe this will prompt the U.S. to allocate more resources to the Western Hemisphere in areas such as intelligence, military, law enforcement, and economic strategy, essentially announcing with an air of superiority America's right to intervene in Latin America. The report states that the U.S. "leans toward non-interventionism," but over the past year, the Trump administration has significantly increased economic pressure and political interference in Latin American countries.

Considering the current tense U.S.-Venezuela situation, experts from the American think tank Atlantic Council believe the report sends two major signals: the largest U.S. military deployment in the Caribbean in over 30 years is not a temporary phenomenon; and the ultimate U.S. goal in Venezuela is to overthrow the Maduro government and install a pro-American regime.

Adjusting Global Military Presence

While emphasizing Western Hemisphere priority, the report states the intention to correspondingly "recalibrate America's global military presence," reducing the allocation of military resources to regions of "declining relative importance to U.S. national security."

The report does not specify which regions are of declining importance, but some experts interpret from its content that Europe, the Middle East, and Africa have all seen a decrease in priority within U.S. foreign and security policy.

Based on the report's content, the Trump administration's approach to adjusting global military presence mainly follows these lines of thought.

First, seeking to reduce the global security burden. This involves emphasizing that allies and partners must end "free-riding" and assume primary responsibility for defense in their own regions. It also stresses that the U.S. must avoid costly "forever wars" and prevent regional conflicts from escalating into intercontinental and global wars. Furthermore, it generally downplays the threat of terrorism.

Second, seeking to "rebuild strategic stability with Russia." The report states that a core U.S. interest is to end the Ukraine crisis as soon as possible, accuses Europe of obstructing U.S. efforts to end the crisis, states that the U.S. will prevent the continuous expansion of NATO, and questions the future reliability of the transatlantic alliance.

Third, promoting U.S. reindustrialization to "rebuild the defense industrial base." The report views economic security as the foundation of national security, pointing out that the U.S. not only needs to dominate fields like artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and supercomputing but also requires a strong defense industry and manufacturing base. It calls for expanding U.S. access to global critical minerals, emphasizing the need to avoid dependence on others in critical supply chains and technological links. It also advocates strengthening America's "energy dominance" and "financial dominance" to maintain long-term advantages in the U.S. economy, industrial base, and technological innovation capabilities.

The report states, "The era of the Middle East dominating long-term planning and day-to-day execution of U.S. foreign policy is over." However, Jon Hoffman, a researcher at the U.S. think tank Cato Institute, believes that the U.S. remains deeply entangled in Middle Eastern affairs to this day, and "whether Trump has the political will to fundamentally change the Middle East policy course remains to be seen." Emily Harding, a researcher at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), pointed out that several past U.S. administrations have hoped to shift foreign policy focus, but Middle East issues "always have a way of pulling America back."

Anti-Immigration, Anti-Globalization Vision

The report reflects that the Trump administration's vision for the global order is based on the principle of "America First." Its prominent features include: anti-immigration, anti-globalization, promotion of Western identity, rejection of the "climate change" concept, downplaying transnational cooperation issues, and accusing some international organizations of being driven by "anti-Americanism" and "transnationalism." In this vision, the U.S. no longer sees itself as the primary provider of a multilateral order but chooses to participate selectively based on its own interests.

The report carries strong anti-immigration undertones, attributing many current dilemmas in the U.S., Europe, and even the world to immigration issues. It claims that large-scale migration changes the culture and economy of traditional world powers, weakening their dominance. The report states that the U.S. cannot allow its labor market to be opened under the guise of "seeking global talent," which harms American workers.

The report's rhetoric targeting Europe is highly confrontational, echoing U.S. Vice President Vance's speech at the Munich Security Conference earlier this year. It warns that Europe faces a "grim prospect of civilizational demise" due to immigration policies, economic stagnation, regulation by transnational institutions like the EU, declining birth rates, and loss of self-confidence. It states that the U.S. aims to "help Europe correct its current trajectory" and "cultivate forces of resistance within European countries."

Natalie Tocci, Director of the Italian Institute of International Affairs, commented that this indicates the Trump administration's willingness to prioritize developing U.S.-Russia relations, leaving Europe "isolated and helpless" on issues like the Ukraine crisis and European continental security.

Rick Landgraf, Commentary Editor at the U.S. website "War on the Rocks," believes the report shows that the U.S. now views its own security in a more inward-looking and narrow way than before.

However, it is noteworthy that while opposing America "bearing the world order alone," the report repeatedly states that "the United States cannot permit any nation to grow so powerful that it threatens American interests," and "we must also prevent others from achieving global or regional dominance." The logic of power politics is also evident throughout the report. It not only continues the slogan of "peace through strength" but also bluntly states: "It is an enduring truth of international relations that large, rich, and powerful nations wield outsized influence."

Foreign Policy magazine published an article stating the report "aims to selectively impose the U.S. president's worldview on the globe." The Economist commented that the report "descends into naked power projection." (End)