• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Hard Power and Soft Power

Interesting take on the new National Security Strategy. Heard that Michael Anton of the Claremont institute (famed for writing the “Flight 93” article that was influential in getting Republicans behind Trump in the 2016 election vs Secretary of State Clinton) had a big part.

It does seem like a return to the Monroe Doctrine.

warontherocks.com

Ten Jolting Takeaways from Trump’s New National Security Strategy

The new National Security Strategy is out, and it’s a shock to the system. It is not just the latest public articulation of principles, ambitions, and
warontherocks.com
 
Randy Daytona said:
Interesting take on the new National Security Strategy. Heard that Michael Anton of the Claremont institute (famed for writing the “Flight 93” article that was influential in getting Republicans behind Trump in the 2016 election vs Secretary of State Clinton) had a big part.

It does seem like a return to the Monroe Doctrine.

warontherocks.com

Ten Jolting Takeaways from Trump’s New National Security Strategy

The new National Security Strategy is out, and it’s a shock to the system. It is not just the latest public articulation of principles, ambitions, and
warontherocks.com
Click to expand...
It is too much political cheerleading…much like the “Trump Institute of Peace,” a rather silly naming that will dissolve in an administration or two. That said, I do think there is some room for kicking some old, and no longer functional, conventions down the road. I’m fine with pursuing the “golden dome” or whatever you want to call it, and putting Russia and China on alert that we aren’t all that afraid of their nukes (or at least make that bluff). The only reason the world is tolerating Russia’s efforts in the Ukraine is because we are afraid of their nuclear stockpiles - and I agree that saving Ukraine’s ass isn’t worth a nuclear exchange- while at the same time wishing we could treat Russia for what it is…a third rate power. I’m not sure, and the document isn’t clear on, the value of a western hemispheric defense when it ignores most of our power allies, but I also believe we need to invigorate our Pacific connections, especially South Korea, Japan, Australia, and India, against China…and current tariff policy isn’t working.
 
Last edited:
Griz882 said:
It is too much political cheerleading…much like the “Trump Institute of Peace,” a rather silly naming that will dissolve in an administration or two. That said, I do think there is some room for kicking some old, and no longer functional, conventions down the road. I’m fine with pursuing the “golden dome” or whatever you want to call it, and putting Russia and China on alert that we aren’t all that afraid of their nukes (or at least make that bluff). The only reason the world is tolerating Russia’s efforts in the Ukraine is because we are afraid of their nuclear stockpiles - and I agree that saving Ukraine’s ass isn’t worth a nuclear exchange- while at the same time wishing we could treat Russia for what it is…a third rate power. I’m not sure, and the document isn’t clear on, the value of a western hemispheric defense when it ignores most of our power allies, but I also believe we need to invigorate our Pacific connections, especially South Korea, Japan, Australia, and India, against China…and current tariff policy isn’t working.
Click to expand...
This administration - and the NSS is no exception - has a stark tendency to give Trump extreme praise. They will take every opportunity to tell the public that Trump is the best president the nation has ever seen. It's actually quite cringeworthy.

I like the War on the Rocks' analysis that making the NSS about Trump instead of America will communicate to the world that America's commitment to this strategy will only last as long as Trump is in office. As a counter-point, I think most of America's potential adversaries are headed by long-term dictators who already know that America has fickle foreign policy priorities.

There's also quite a bit of crappy stylistic writing where the author is trying to give the public a lesson in international security studies vocabulary, but the people who don't know that stuff aren't reading this document.

Beyond that, the rest was kind of predictable based on Trump's rhetoric - rebalance trade, focus on security and economic interests in the Western Hemisphere, divest from European and Middle Eastern affairs, maintain military parity with China while not placing us on an inevitable collision course. I really can't say any of that is unreasonable. The thing is, this is a relatively seismic shift in priorities as far as NSS's go, particularly elevating TCOs / western Hemisphere from priority 100 of 10 to number 1, and 'institutional inertia' hates that sort of thing.

On the positive end, I do like how this NSS addresses the criticism that every NWC class has of past NSS's... this one actually has a clear-cut, tangible delineation of ends / ways / means and does so in roughly half the amount of pages.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top