America
State Department outlines aggressive ‘Donroe Doctrine’ and ‘America First’ overhaul for 2026-2030
A strategic plan released by the US Department of State confirms the Trump administration’s intent to focus on the “Western Hemisphere” while signaling that its “national security” strategy will be anchored in “American exceptionalism.”
Detailing foreign policy strategy for the 2026–2030 period, the document emphasizes an “America First” approach to global diplomacy and national security.
The plan prioritizes national sovereignty through strict border enforcement and diminished deference to international organizations. Key regional objectives include establishing dominance in the “Western Hemisphere” via the “Donroe Doctrine” and deterring aggression in the Indo-Pacific.
Economic targets focus on the re-industrialization of the US, securing supply chains, and maintaining technological superiority over rivals such as China. Furthermore, the strategy aims to transform foreign assistance into a targeted tool of statecraft that prioritizes trade over traditional aid.
Ultimately, this framework seeks to restore American exceptionalism by aligning all diplomatic and commercial relations with the nation’s core national interests.
The “America First” policy outlined in the plan redefines US national sovereignty by rejecting global integration and advocating for strict border control and independence, transforming global engagement into a structure that is pragmatic, transactional, and responsive to concrete national interests.
This approach characterizes the prior consensus on multilateralism and globalization not merely as self-defeating, but as a path toward “civilizational and geopolitical suicide.” A similar perspective regarding Europe and migration was previously articulated in the US National Security Strategy (NSS).
National sovereignty receives particular emphasis in foreign affairs planning. The policy establishes that the US government’s primary duty is to ensure the nation’s survival as an “autonomous republic.” This definition of sovereignty is presented through three fundamental pillars:
Absolute Border Control: The plan argues that the era of mass migration has ended, viewing “uncontrolled migration” as an affront to sovereignty and a tool used by previous administrations to harm the nation. Sovereignty is redefined to include the active “reverse migration” of those with no right to remain, alongside rigorous vetting to ensure visitors do not hold attitudes hostile to American principles.
Rejection of global governance: The US declares it will no longer submit to “unelected international bureaucrats” or international organizations that act contrary to American interests. This includes the UN’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which is viewed as a “soft global governance” program incompatible with US sovereignty.
Protection from foreign interference: According to the plan, sovereignty also requires protecting the natural rights of Americans from foreign censorship and influence operations, including efforts by international organizations attempting to restrict freedom of speech under the guise of combating “hate speech” or “disinformation.”
The US Department of State declares that henceforth, global engagement will shift away from the “arrogant paternalism” of attempting to reshape the world in the image of Western democracies, moving instead toward “pragmatic diplomacy” and “realism.” This new stance prioritizes “peace through strength” and a clear prioritization of resources.
In the “Western Hemisphere,” this policy constitutes the “Donroe Doctrine,” which advocates for the “absolute supremacy” of the US. Moving beyond the traditional Monroe Doctrine, this doctrine treats not only foreign military presence but also unchecked economic interference by powers outside the hemisphere, migration, and drug trafficking as hostile acts.
The US aims to empower “self-reliant allies” who contribute their “fair share” to collective security. For instance, the “Civilizational Alliance” with Europe demands that NATO allies spend 5% of their GDP on defense and assume primary responsibility for conventional European defense.
Foreign policy is acknowledged as being increasingly driven by commercial interests, with the aim of “re-industrializing” the US and ending reliance on foreign supply chains. The document explicitly links economic security with national sovereignty, declaring the use of tariffs to correct trade deficits and the employment of commercial diplomacy to prevent rivals like China from dominating critical industries.
The strategic plan outlines seven sectors as the focal point of US re-industrialization efforts:
Energy and Resources: Energy production and critical minerals.
Advanced Manufacturing and Hardware: Advanced manufacturing, robotics, machine tools, and shipbuilding.
High Tech and Computing: Semiconductors, computing, artificial intelligence (AI), data storage, and quantum science.
Healthcare: Pharmaceuticals and medical devices.
Aerospace and Defense: Space and aviation, unmanned and autonomous systems, and material sciences.
Infrastructure: Critical and advanced infrastructure, telecommunications, and transportation logistics.
Future Science: Biotechnology.
In addition to this broad list, the document indicates that specific attention is paid to certain sub-sectors to ensure economic and technological dominance. For example, regarding energy dominance, special emphasis is placed on natural gas, nuclear technology, and nuclear fuel exports. This is viewed as a means to end Europe’s dependence on Russia and stimulate domestic economic growth.
The plan effectively eliminates USAID by transferring its functions to the Department of State to ensure aid serves as an “instrument of statecraft” rather than “philanthropy.” The new focus will be “trade, not aid,” prioritizing private sector collaboration and investment that advance specific US diplomatic and security objectives.
Starting in 2026, the Department of State aims to spend at least 40% of its total aid budget in the Western Hemisphere and East Asia regions. This target represents a significant reorganization of resources in line with strategic priorities, as the plan notes that in 2024, USAID spent only 10% to 15% of its aid budget in the Western Hemisphere and Asia-Pacific regions.
The document deems the previous policy “unacceptable” and argues that aid must be refocused on these priority areas to advance US economic, security, and diplomatic goals.
The strategic plan defines the US response to China’s rise as the “defining story of the 21st century.” Citing its economic weight and strategic sea lanes, the document characterizes the Indo-Pacific region as critical to US interests, outlining a strategy based on “peace through strength” to deter aggression and restore American economic independence.
The primary economic objective in the Indo-Pacific is to support US re-industrialization and break dependency on Chinese supply chains. The strategy explicitly rejects “dependencies created by China” and outlines various measures to counter Beijing’s economic influence. For example, it declares aggressive opposition to China’s “intellectual property theft” and “predatory state-directed economic strategies.”
The Middle East is mentioned briefly in the plan. US strategy in the Middle East focuses on strengthening self-reliant allies, deepening economic and technological integration, and countering hostile attacks.
The strategy document highlights the Abraham Accords as the primary model for regional engagement. It emphasizes creating “self-reliant allies” capable of addressing regional challenges independently by establishing economic and technological partnerships with the US.
Israel is defined as a key strategic and technological partner. The Department of State plans to lead efforts to export the “American artificial intelligence technology stack” specifically to “trusted partners like Israel.” This is seen as a way to secure a competitive advantage and deny adversaries access to cutting-edge technologies.
The strategy explicitly states that the US will not permit international organizations to be used as weapons to target “citizens of partner nations like Israel.”
The document notes that the US uses its power to facilitate peace in unresolved conflicts, citing the example of Israel and Gaza.
The strategy identifies Iran as a geopolitical rival alongside China and Russia. The US pledges to “rigorously protect” its political, security, and economic interests against Iranian violations by maintaining a posture of “peace through strength” to deter Iran’s “aggression.”
The plan also proposes “burden sharing” with Europe in the Middle East, setting an expectation for European allies to assume greater responsibility for global security. Specifically, it calls on European states to make a “net contribution to the security of Africa and the Middle East” while rebuilding their own conventional defense capacities.
America
Trump intervention prompts FIFA to lift suspension of US striker Balogun ahead of Belgium clash
US President Donald Trump intervened with FIFA to request a review of a red card suspension handed to US footballer Folarin Balogun, leading the global governing body to unexpectedly lift the ban, it has emerged.
Belgian football authorities have reportedly been granted the right to appeal the FIFA decision, which overturned a one-match suspension given to Balogun, a striker for the US Men’s National Team.
The two teams are scheduled to face each other tonight at 03:00 Turkish time (TRT) in a Round of 16 fixture. The winner of the match will advance to the quarterfinals to play either Portugal or Spain.
Trump welcomed the decision by FIFA, which enables the 25-year-old Balogun to play in tonight’s match against Belgium in Seattle despite receiving a red card during Wednesday’s 2-0 victory over Bosnia and Herzegovina.
“Thank you to FIFA for doing the right thing and correcting a major injustice!” Trump wrote on his Truth Social account.
According to a report by The Athletic, the Royal Belgian Football Association (RBFA) has been granted the right to formally appeal the decision.
Sources told the publication that to avoid any conflict of interest, Belgium’s appeal will be evaluated by a member of the FIFA Appeal Committee who does not represent any federation from Europe or the Americas.
UEFA, the governing body of European football, is expected to issue a statement on the matter later today.
On Wednesday, Balogun received a controversial red card for a foul, resulting in the top US goalscorer being sent off during his team’s 2-0 victory against Bosnia and Herzegovina.
The red card carried an automatic, immediate one-match suspension, which traditionally allowed no right of appeal.
However, for the first time in more than 60 years of World Cup match history, FIFA announced it would allow Balogun to play in the subsequent fixture.
“The automatic match suspension imposed on the US player Folarin Balogun is suspended for a probationary period of one (1) year,” FIFA said in a statement on Sunday.
Citing Article 27 of its disciplinary code, FIFA stated: “The judicial body may decide to suspend the implementation of a disciplinary measure fully or closely.”
The New York Times, citing three people familiar with the conversation, reported that Trump called FIFA President Gianni Infantino on Wednesday to request a review of Balogun’s suspension.
Sports broadcaster Ben Jacobs first reported that the White House had contacted Infantino for this purpose.
MS NOW confirmed that Trump called the FIFA president. Citing a US official, MS NOW reported that during the call, Trump sought to better understand why Balogun was shown the red card and why it resulted in a suspension.
The official said the US government submitted “additional evidence” to FIFA, and the federation’s Disciplinary Committee utilized this information in the process that led to the lifting of Balogun’s suspension.
According to officials, the government focused on the fact that referees reviewed slow-motion replays before the red card was shown.
“Ultimately, a correct and appropriate result was achieved,” the official told MS NOW.
The Royal Belgian Football Association stated it was “astonished” by FIFA’s change of stance regarding Balogun’s suspension and argued that the move violated FIFA’s written regulations.
The federation said it was “exploring all possible options.”
Trump has been heavily involved in the tournament, which the US is co-hosting alongside Mexico and Canada. The president maintains a close relationship with FIFA President Infantino.
Trump’s 2025 financial disclosure, made public last week, revealed that Infantino gifted Trump 10 tickets worth $15,000 for the FIFA Club World Cup final held last July at MetLife Stadium in New Jersey.
Trump attended the match, in which Chelsea defeated Paris Saint-Germain 3-0, and appeared on the pitch alongside Infantino to present the trophy.
America
US military takes delivery of radar-less F-35 fighter jets
The US military has begun taking delivery of F-35 fighter jets without radar systems after Northrop Grumman was unable to manufacture the aircraft’s new AN/APG-85 radar quickly enough for installation on upgraded Lockheed Martin jets leaving the production line.
The aircraft are being delivered without the radars, each valued at about $9 million, which are considered essential for combat operations and battlefield effectiveness.
According to The Bunker, six US Marine Corps F-35s have already been delivered without radar systems.
An unspecified number of F-35s destined for the US Air Force and US Navy will also be delivered without radars. The new radar systems are not expected to be available before 2028.
The current radar cannot be fitted into the upgraded F-35 configuration.
One reason the approximately $196 million F-35 carries such a high price tag is its complex shape, stealth coating and integrated electronic architecture, all designed to reduce its radar signature.
According to The Bunker, the situation is comparable to “carbines without bullets, tanks without armor, ships without oceans, or nuclear weapons without the nuclear.”
The issue has become emblematic of the broader F-35 program. The $2 trillion project continues to struggle with readiness problems, in part because the Pentagon has not purchased enough spare parts to keep its fleet operational.
The radar shortfall is particularly notable because it marks a second instance in which perceived future threats have contributed to procurement complications.
A decade after the program began, then-Pentagon acquisition chief Frank Kendall said in 2012 that the initial rush to put the F-35 into production while its design was still evolving had been “acquisition malpractice.”
This time, the Pentagon says it deliberately accepted the risks of a “highly concurrent development and production program” to upgrade the F-35 so it could “maintain air superiority against future threats.”
In simple terms, “highly concurrent” means manufacturing components before the aircraft’s design has been finalized.
That approach ultimately left the aircraft without their new radar systems, repeating the same practice that Kendall criticized 14 years ago.
The radar-less F-35s will not remain grounded while awaiting the new electronic equipment.
Instead, the Pentagon now possesses a growing fleet of what has effectively become some of the world’s most expensive jet trainers.
America
Poll finds 29% of Americans open to voting for a democratic socialist candidate
A new public opinion survey in the United States suggests that nearly one-third of voters would be willing to support a democratic socialist candidate in an election.
According to the joint Economist/YouGov poll, 29% of respondents said they would be willing to vote for a democratic socialist candidate, while 45% said they would not support such a candidate. Another 26% said they were undecided.
The survey comes after democratic socialist candidates posted recent electoral successes in New York, Washington, DC, Los Angeles and the state of Colorado.
The democratic socialist movement in the US has gained significantly greater visibility, particularly since the election of New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani last year.
Independent Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders brought the modern democratic socialist movement into the mainstream of US politics during his 2016 presidential campaign, a process that was followed several years later by the election of Democratic New York Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
The two politicians are widely regarded as the most prominent figures of democratic socialism in contemporary American politics.
In a post on social media platform X, Senator Bernie Sanders said: “When I look at the recent progressive victories in Colorado and elsewhere, and at the successful organizing campaigns taking root across the country, I believe we may be on the verge of the political revolution we have been fighting for.”
The Economist/YouGov survey also examined broader public attitudes toward the concept of socialism. It found that 32% of respondents viewed socialism “very favorably” or “somewhat favorably,” while 39% said they viewed it “somewhat unfavorably” or “very unfavorably.” Another 29% said they were undecided on the issue.
The Economist/YouGov survey was conducted between June 26 and June 29 among 1,606 respondents. The poll’s margin of error was 3.2%.
-
Middle East1 week agoQatar and Saudi Arabia acquire hundreds of millions of dollars in Israeli defense technology, report says
-
Europe1 week agoBuckingham Palace updates King’s official role to focus on securing faith in multi-faith Britain
-
America2 weeks agoVenezuela prepares record $240 billion sovereign debt restructuring
-
Asia2 weeks agoAnthropic accuses China’s Alibaba of systematic data theft targeting Claude AI model
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoNATO draft declaration pledges €70 billion to Ukraine ahead of Ankara summit
-
Europe2 weeks agoFrance launches Defence Quantum Campus to accelerate military technology integration
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoWhite House requests $672 million from Congress to neutralize Iran nuclear program
-
Interview1 week ago“Capitalism does not require a free social order”
