America
New US national security strategy: The end of globalization and the return of the Monroe Doctrine
The Donald Trump administration’s new National Security Strategy (NSS), the publication of which had been delayed for a long time, has been released.
The 33-page document shapes the security perspective of the US at both global and national levels.
In writing the foreword for NSS 2025, Trump claims that they have turned the US back from “destruction and disaster” since the first day of his second presidential term. He asserts that after “four years of weakness, extremism, and deadly failures,” his administration has restored the power of the US at home and abroad at “historic speed” and brought “peace and stability” to the world.
Stating that “No country, region, issue, or cause—no matter how worthy—can be the focus of American strategy,” NSS 2025 points out that the purpose of foreign policy is the “protection of fundamental national interests.”
Argued that American strategies formed since the end of the Cold War have been insufficient, the new NSS criticizes relevant strategies for consisting merely of “a list of aspirations or desired end states.”
Suggesting that previous strategies failed to “clearly define what the US wanted,” NSS 2025 believes that instead, expressions consisting of “vague clichés” were used, and often, “what the US should want” was evaluated incorrectly.
NSS 2025 states the following:
“Since the end of the Cold War, American foreign policy elites convinced themselves that permanent American dominance over the entire world was in our country’s best interest. However, the affairs of other countries concern us only insofar as their activities directly threaten our interests.”
Viewing the “nation-building” processes of the US, particularly in the Middle East, critically, NSS 2025 says, “Our elites vastly miscalculated the willingness of the American people to forever bear global burdens that they viewed as having no connection to national interests.”
The strategy document argues that previous foreign policymakers overestimated the ability of the US to simultaneously fund a massive military, diplomatic, intelligence, and foreign aid complex alongside a massive social welfare, regulatory, and administrative state. It asserts that they made “extremely wrong and destructive bets” on globalization and free trade, thereby hollowing out “the middle class and industrial base upon which the American economy and military superiority depend.”
Directing criticisms at international institutions as well as the US bearing the burden of its “allies,” NSS 2025 says the following:
“They allowed allies and partners to offload defense costs onto the American people and sometimes drag us into conflicts and disputes that were central to their interests but insignificant or irrelevant to ours. And they tethered American policy to a network of international institutions, some driven by open anti-Americanism, and most by a transnational approach explicitly aiming to eliminate individual state sovereignty. In short, our elites not only pursued a fundamentally unwanted and impossible goal, but in doing so, they also undermined the means necessary to achieve that goal—namely, the character of our nation, which forms the foundation of our power, wealth, and morality.”
Describing Trump’s policies as a “necessary correction,” the new NSS argues that the US primarily wants “the government to ensure the existence and security of the US as an independent, sovereign republic that secures the God-given natural rights of its citizens and prioritizes their welfare and interests.”
Emphasizing the desire to protect the country from “military attacks and hostile foreign influences such as espionage, predatory trade practices, drug and human trafficking, destructive propaganda and influence operations, cultural destruction, or other threats to our nation,” NSS 2025 counts full control over borders, the immigration system, and transportation networks where people enter the US “legally and illegally” among its fundamental goals.
Placing special emphasis on military capacity, the NSS writes, “To protect the American people, America’s assets abroad, and its allies, we want to possess the world’s most robust, reliable, and modern nuclear deterrence system and next-generation missile defense systems, including a Golden Dome for the American homeland.”
Acknowledging that the US industrial base is also critical for its global-military role, NSS 2025 announces that it will prioritize industrial policies:
“American national power depends on a strong industrial sector capable of meeting production demands in peacetime and wartime. This requires not only direct defense industry production capacity but also defense-related production capacity. Developing American industrial power must become the highest priority of national economic policy.”
Going for a “correction” regarding American “soft power” as well, NSS 2025 declares that while displaying the soft power of the US, they will respect the different religions, cultures, and governance systems of other countries “without feeling regret about the country’s past and present.”
The document states, “‘Soft power’ that serves America’s true national interests can only be effective when we believe in our country’s innate greatness and honesty.”
In this context, listing its expectations from the world, the American administration declares with an overt reference to the Monroe Doctrine that it will not allow a breach in US hegemony in the “Western Hemisphere”:
“We want to ensure the Western Hemisphere is a reasonably stable and well-governed region to prevent and deter mass migration to the United States; we want a Hemisphere where governments cooperate with us against narco-terrorists, cartels, and other international criminal organizations; we want a Hemisphere that is not subject to hostile foreign attacks or the seizure of significant assets and that supports critical supply chains; and we want to maintain our access to key strategic locations. In other words, we will add a ‘Trump Corollary’ to the Monroe Doctrine and enforce it.”
The document openly declares that after “years of neglect,” the US will reinstate and enforce the Monroe Doctrine to restore American superiority in the “Western Hemisphere” and to “protect the homeland and access to key geographical areas in the region.”
NSS 2025 states, “We will prevent adversaries outside the Hemisphere from positioning forces or other threatening capabilities in our hemisphere or from owning or controlling assets of vital strategic importance”:
“Our goals for the Western Hemisphere can be summarized as ‘Enlist and Expand.’ We will enlist our established friends in the hemisphere to control migration, stop the flow of drugs, and strengthen stability and security on land and at sea. While increasing our country’s appeal as the hemisphere’s preferred economic and security partner, we will expand by developing and strengthening new partners.”
In this context, it is stated that the global military presence of the US will also be re-evaluated with the Western Hemisphere in mind.
Stopping and reversing the damage caused by “foreign actors” to the American economy, while also keeping the Indo-Pacific region “free and open,” protecting freedom of navigation on all major sea lanes, and “maintaining secure and reliable supply chains and access to critical materials” are also among the priorities of NSS 2025.
Stating that they want to support allies in “protecting Europe’s freedom and security” while Europe restores “self-confidence” in its own civilization and its “Western identity,” NSS 2025 appears to continue the criticism of “endless wars” that began during the Barack Obama era by saying, “We want to prevent a hostile power from dominating the Middle East, its oil and natural gas resources, and the chokepoints through which they pass, and at the same time prevent the ‘endless wars’ that drag us into a quagmire in that region at great cost.”
Noting that they want to ensure US technology and US standards lead the world forward, particularly in the fields of artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and quantum computing, the new strategy asserts that all these are “fundamental and vital national interests” of the US and states, “While we have other interests, these are the interests we must focus on above all else, and which will be to our detriment if we ignore or neglect them”:
“President Trump’s foreign policy is pragmatic without being ‘pragmatist,’ realistic without being ‘realist,’ principled without being ‘idealist,’ strong without being ‘hawkish,’ and measured without being ‘dovish.’ It is not based on traditional political ideology. It focuses above all on what works for America, in two words: ‘America First.’”
Stopping regional conflicts before they turn into “global wars dragging in entire continents” is seen as a priority of this administration.
Stating, “A world on fire, where wars reach our shores, is bad for American interests,” NSS 2025 claims that Trump uses “unconventional diplomacy,” “America’s military power,” and “economic leverage” to “surgically extinguish” the sparks of violent wars caused by divisions between nuclear-armed countries and “centuries-old hatred.”
Continuing to point to the magnitude of the US military power globally and the reserve currency role of the dollar, the document underscores that, in addition to these, they will revitalize the “culture of competence” and competitiveness by reversing diversity policies known as “DEI.”
Making a “middle class” emphasis as well, the document points specifically to energy and industrialization:
“To support growth and innovation, strengthen and rebuild the middle class, unleashing our massive energy production capacity as a strategic priority;
To re-industrialize our economy to further support the middle class and control our own supply chains and production capacity.”
In this context, the document values the role of tax cuts and deregulation and dreams of making the US “the most suitable place to do business and invest capital.”
In this regard, it is emphasized that the Trump administration’s foreign policy will be guided by the following principles:
- Focused Definition of National Interests
- Peace Through Strength
- Inclination Toward Non-Intervention
- Flexible Realism
- Primacy of Nations
- Sovereignty and Respect
- Balance of Power
- Supporting the American Worker
- Justice
- Competence and Merit
NSS 2025 states in this context that the era of mass migration has ended; fundamental rights and freedoms will be defended; burdens will be both shared and differentiated; rearrangements will be made through peace; and importance will be given to economic security through balanced trade, industrialization, and securing access to critical supply chains.
More than 700 wealthy foreign nationals have applied for New Zealand residency under the country’s “golden visa” programme over the past 14 months, compared with just 115 applications during the previous three years.
Applicants are required to invest at least NZ$5 million in local funds, companies or charitable organisations within three years.
A further 127 people have applied under a separate programme that requires an investment of NZ$10 million in passive assets such as bonds for five years.
The surge followed a relaxation of rules governing property purchases, investment requirements and the amount of time applicants must spend in the country to qualify.
According to the Financial Times (FT), the increase in applications for the right to live, work and study indefinitely in New Zealand has coincided with a period of geopolitical uncertainty that has made the country’s security and remote location increasingly attractive.
Dozens of countries around the world, from Portugal to the US, offer preferential immigration treatment in exchange for investment or, in some cases, cash payments.
Many have had mixed experiences with such schemes. Ireland, Malta and Australia have scrapped their programmes because of insufficient demand or concerns over abuse.
In New Zealand’s case, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon hopes the visas will attract more foreign investment and help reverse a “brain drain” that threatens the country’s economic growth.
Although tourists often fall in love with New Zealand and dream of moving there, many young New Zealanders leave in search of better economic opportunities.
According to Luxon, New Zealand start-ups have already begun benefiting from the policy.
“While everyone else around the world is tightening restrictions, we’ve opened the doors and our start-ups have benefited enormously from the capital flowing in, as well as from the knowledge and technical expertise these investors have brought,” he said.
Since the programme was comprehensively overhauled in April 2025, applicants from North America, Europe and Asia have committed a combined NZ$4.8 billion, through investments of either NZ$5 million or NZ$10 million each.
That figure is comparable to the NZ$14.8 billion in foreign investment recorded during the first quarter of this year.
Lachlan Nixon, co-founder of venture capital firm Motion Capital, said the programme had become “a badge of honour in Silicon Valley”.
Data show that 277 applications have come from Americans, with Californians showing particularly strong interest in obtaining New Zealand residency.
“A massive influx of capital is coming, but what really matters is the quality of the people now investing in the New Zealand economy,” Nixon said. He added that 40% of a recent NZ$27 million fundraising round for high-growth New Zealand companies came from 30 holders of “golden visas”.
According to Luxon, companies benefiting from the programme include critical minerals firm Zethos, which appointed European steel industry veteran Francesc Rubiralta to its board.
Nixon said other companies backed under the programme include seed oil protein producer Miruku and magnesium mining company Aspiring Materials.
In the mountain town of Queenstown, a preferred destination for many applicants, locals refer to billionaires such as Peter Thiel and Anthony Malkin, whose foundation owns New York’s Empire State Building, as “the secret residents on the hills”.
Most prefer to keep their wealth and presence private. Thiel’s citizenship was inadvertently revealed during a parliamentary debate, while Malkin’s presence became public after fireworks he set off on New Year’s Eve sparked grass fires.
According to Cotality, their arrival has made Queenstown New Zealand’s most expensive property market, with a median home price of NZ$1.8 million, double the national average.
Under the visa programme’s rules, participants may purchase only residential properties worth more than NZ$5 million, a provision designed to prevent their presence from distorting the broader housing market.
“There are a lot of billionaires here. They just wear gumboots,” one property adviser said.
However, doubts remain about the programme’s benefits. Sam Stubbs, chief executive of pension fund Simplicity, said people should make “genuine investments” in the country rather than seek special treatment in exchange for “a small amount of money” invested in a venture capital fund.
“Heaven comes at a price. It’s a price we all pay,” Stubbs said.
Some applicants have also voiced concerns. Courtney Andelman, who runs a venture capital fund in Santa Barbara with her husband Jim, successfully obtained a visa last year and now visits New Zealand regularly.
“There’s something magical in the air and the water. It’s an incredibly healthy place,” Andelman said.
However, she said she wanted to settle in a smaller South Island city such as Nelson, where her investments could have a greater impact, but found very few properties worth more than NZ$5 million.
She also complained that under New Zealand’s tax rules, if her family spends more than 183 days a year in the country, their worldwide income becomes subject to New Zealand taxation.
Andelman said she loved New Zealand but expressed concern and issued an implicit warning.
“How to make every dollar achieve its highest and best use is a question we constantly ask ourselves. If New Zealand doesn’t offer the best value, we’ll go somewhere else. Every one of those dollars is mobile.”
Oil industry executives and White House officials are engaging in a new push to prevent any move by the administration to restrict US oil exports.
According to a report by Politico, industry representatives say these efforts extend to the White House Domestic Policy Council, the National Energy Dominance Council, the Department of Energy, and Chief of Staff Susie Wiles.
Trump believes that oil prices could harm the Republicans’ chances of maintaining control of Congress in the November mid-term elections.
“Everyone from the industry and within the administration is working hand in hand to prevent this,” an energy industry executive said.
The individual added that White House officials had not formally raised the idea, “but everyone knows Trump will act like Trump again.”
The White House maintains that export restrictions are not on the agenda.
White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers said in a statement: “While the President and the entire energy team are taking various measures to mitigate temporary disruptions in the energy market, the administration has been very clear: there is no plan to impose restrictions on oil and gas exports.”
White House representatives did not confirm whether industry lobbyists had approached specific agencies or officials to discuss the export issue. Department of Energy representatives did not respond to queries.
However, although administration officials have guaranteed since the early days of the Iranian war that an export ban was off the table, Trump’s directive to the Department of Justice in June to investigate oil companies on charges of price gouging put the sector on high alert.
Concerns within the industry mounted after Trump stated on Monday that oil giants Exxon Mobil and Chevron were making “too much money.”
Industry executives now fear Trump may try to make a move against them by restricting fuel export activities abroad, which have boomed since the start of the US-Israeli war against Iran.
Another industry official said the sector had reiterated its concerns regarding export controls to the White House “very recently.”
The Trump administration has already tried several different approaches to lower prices that enjoy broader support from the oil industry.
These include the release of millions of barrels of oil from the country’s strategic petroleum reserve and the temporary suspension of the Jones Act to make it easier for non-American vessels to transport oil and natural gas between US ports.
Energy Secretary Chris Wright, a former oil company CEO, and Vice President JD Vance have repeatedly opposed the idea of limiting or banning exports.
Wright stated in May that the administration had “definitely” ruled out the option of banning diesel exports.
Mike Sommers, president of the American Petroleum Institute, said he was “confident” Trump understood the need to maintain oil exports, recalling that early in the crisis, the president had encouraged other countries to buy American oil:
“The administration has repeatedly expressed that they are opposed to [export controls]. Therefore, I do not think there is any change in their stance at the moment. Frankly, it feels as though we have to clarify this issue every three weeks.”
In a note sent to clients on Tuesday, consultancy firm ClearView Energy stated that the moment for the White House to take a step toward limiting fuel exports “might be approaching.”
The firm noted that former President Joe Biden had considered imposing export restrictions ahead of the 2022 mid-term elections following a “long summer of high petrol prices” caused by the war in Ukraine.
US crude oil exports increased by approximately 30% compared with last year, reaching nearly 3.5 million barrels per day by the end of July.
Shipments of refined products such as diesel, petrol, and other types of oil rose by 20%, exceeding 8 million barrels per day.
Opponents of exports argue that sending these cargoes abroad leads to rising prices domestically.
However, the oil and gas industry contends that closing the door to exports would harm the domestic market and cause their production to decline.
“Export bans may seem politically attractive, but ultimately they will lead to the exact opposite of the intended effect,” said a refining industry lobbyist who noted they were in contact with the White House on the matter, arguing that cutting off American exports from international markets would mean “a decline in US production, supply shortages, further upward pressure on domestic prices, and even greater disruptions in the global market.”
Chet Thompson, president and CEO of the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, stated that export controls would force US refiners to produce less petrol because they would lose commercial channels to ship other surplus fuels, such as diesel, produced during the process.
Three US senators have reported that intelligence sharing between Washington and Kyiv has reached its former level. The White House declined to disclose details of the current intelligence relationship, emphasizing that President Donald Trump remains focused on ending the conflict.
American senators reported that intelligence sharing between the US and Ukraine has returned to its previous level.
According to a report by Politico, the senators offering this assessment include Democratic Senator Mark Warner, a long-standing advocate for increasing aid to Ukraine.
Commenting on the matter, Warner said: “I don’t want to get into details, but things have improved.” Republican senators John Cornyn and Roger Wicker stated that information sharing has accelerated during a period of “strategic importance”.
Democratic Senator Tim Kaine also noted that he has observed signs of a revival in information sharing between the US and Ukraine.
The White House did not disclose details regarding the current state of its intelligence-sharing relationship with Ukraine. However, in comments to Politico, it emphasized that US President Donald Trump is focused on contributing to the termination of the conflict.
A White House official told Politico: “The President and his team remain committed to playing a constructive role in ending the war between Russia and Ukraine and remain optimistic that we will ultimately reach a peace agreement.”
Last autumn, the Financial Times reported that Trump had issued instructions to prepare for sharing intelligence data that could assist Ukraine in conducting strikes deep inside Russian territory.
Russian authorities are demanding that Western nations cease providing military aid to Ukraine, emphasizing that such assistance will not prevent Moscow from achieving its military campaign objectives.
Last year, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs requested that the US side clarify information regarding the transfer of intelligence data to Ukraine.
According to statements from the Kremlin, Russia has long been aware that the US and NATO countries collect intelligence and transfer it to the Ukrainian military, noting that this is “not a new development”.
Nevertheless, Russian President Vladimir Putin warned that Russia will not tolerate attacks by the Armed Forces of Ukraine and will continue to respond forcefully.
In June, President Vladimir Putin announced that Russia is prepared to conduct negotiations with Ukraine on the basis of the agreements reached in Istanbul.
According to Putin, the parties must also take into account the agreements reached between Moscow and Washington in Anchorage, the situation on the front line, and the conditions for a settlement previously set out by Russia.
The women who refuse to be erased: On Japan’s surrender anniversary, the fight over wartime sexual slavery continues
The U.S. Economy and NATO’s Function
Quincy Institute expert says the United States had no plan B
Türkiye, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia defense agreement: An attack on one will be considered an attack on all
US lawmakers seek terrorist designation for Polisario Front
-
Asia1 week agoChina launches global tax audit on super-rich to recover billions
-
Europe2 weeks agoEuropean nations seek alternatives to Palantir amid growing digital sovereignty concerns
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoDefense Priorities director warns US air strategy in Middle East faces tactical limits
-
Europe1 week agoEuropean carmakers turn to Chinese rivals to salvage struggling plants
-
Europe2 weeks agoEU governments push to narrow “Made in Europe” preference rules in industrial draft bill
-
Opinion2 weeks agoMacroeconomic consequences of asymmetric UAV attacks in Russia
-
Europe2 weeks agoDenmark to deploy conscripts to Greenland for first time amid Arctic security risks
-
Europe2 weeks agoGerman carmakers face historical crisis as Chinese competition and market contraction erode profits
