US National Security Strategy: Focus on the Western Hemisphere and a Cautious Approach to Other Regions

TEHRAN (Defapress) - As the first anniversary of Donald Trump’s victory in the presidential election approaches, the US government’s vision for domestic and foreign policy is clearly outlined in the National Security Strategy, where the relentless pursuit of American interests is a priority.

The document presents other nations mainly as instruments for realizing American interests, and even allies are under heavy pressure. The main question is what the international system that emerges from such an approach looks like.

The National Security Strategy 2025 is more coherent than Trump’s first version and explicitly states that national resources will serve only American interests. National defense is prominent, but the threat definition goes beyond espionage and includes economic influence, drug and human trafficking, propaganda, and cultural operations. Complete control of borders and the immigration system is also an obvious goal, a notable point for a country with a large immigrant population.

The document places particular emphasis on stability in the Western Hemisphere, and it declares itself committed to the Monroe Doctrine and the Trump Corollary. In contrast, the US approach to other regions is more cautious. In the Indo-Pacific, priority is given to freedom of navigation and desirable trade relations, rather than changing the political systems of other countries.

The US focus in Asia is on economic competition and avoiding military conflict. Relations with China are defined as fair trade and mutual respect, and the document does not express any serious concern about authoritarianism or the expansion of Beijing’s global influence. The absence of values ​​such as human rights and freedom from the strategy is striking.

Europe is heavily criticized in the document, described as being on the verge of “civilizational decline.” However, the Trump administration welcomes the increase in European defense spending, a sign of the minimal continuity of the transatlantic alliance, although the distance from shared values ​​is clear.

US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth emphasized at the Reagan National Defense Forum that US policy towards China is based on deterrence, not confrontation. He called for a stable relationship based on free trade and a balance of power, and stressed the stability of US policy towards Taiwan.

The document makes no mention of minilateralism or the role of small allies; countries such as the Philippines and even Japan are not mentioned. Also, the apparent distancing from multilateral institutions and the existing international order has increased concerns about the future of global governance.

The US administration’s focus on the Western Hemisphere could have consequences beyond the limits of international law. In contrast, the cautious approach towards China suggests that other considerations have been set aside to facilitate bilateral negotiations. For Europe and East Asia, the weakening of their position in this document is worrying.
Overall, US international policy in the coming period will enter a phase of profound transformation. Countries will follow more independent paths, and the world may move towards a world leaderless order; an order that will either be accompanied by the collapse of international cooperation or the formation of a new consortium of great powers.

The fate of many countries is tied to alignment with US strategic goals. These developments are a sign of the end of an era that was shaped by the US. Now the world is entering a new era, a period in which relations between the US, Russia, and China will be redefined and a new order will be established.