Analysis of the New "National Security Strategy": A Significant Shift

Key Chapter Title List

1. Introduction
2. Comparison of the Two Strategies
3. Shift in Threat Perception Regarding China
4. Shift in Threat Perception Regarding Russia
5. Neglect of Threats from Iran and North Korea
6. The Law of Unintended Consequences

Document Introduction

This report aims to provide an in-depth analysis of the "National Security Strategy" released during the second term of the Trump administration and compare it with the strategic document of the same name issued during the first term in 2017. The core argument of the report is that the 2025 NSS, in many respects, represents a significant and concerning strategic retreat, particularly in identifying and addressing the most severe external threats facing the United States. The report contends that the new strategy document almost entirely overlooks the challenges posed by China and Russia, which were emphasized in its predecessor and have intensified dramatically in recent years. This fundamental shift in perception poses potential dangers to U.S. security and the reliability of its global alliance system.

The report begins by comparing the 2017 and 2025 NSS documents, revealing their substantial differences in perceiving great power competition, especially regarding threats from China and Russia. The 2017 NSS accurately identified China as the primary external threat to U.S. security and highlighted Russia's revisionist behavior. However, the 2025 NSS downplays or even avoids discussing these threats. The report details a series of aggressive actions by Russia since 2017, including its war against Ukraine, nuclear threats, development of new strategic weapons, violations of the New START treaty, and its "no limits" cooperation with China. Similarly, the report points out significant advancements by China in nuclear arsenal expansion, threats in the Taiwan Strait, militarization of the South China Sea, cyber warfare, and influence operations—none of which are adequately addressed or countered in the 2025 NSS.

In its specific analysis, the report notes that the new strategy, regarding China policy, only proposes rebalancing economic relations without clarifying how this will mitigate the national security threats posed by Beijing. On the South China Sea issue, the strategy is vague, lacking identification of specific competitors and clear response plans. Regarding Russia policy, the document ignores Moscow's responsibility for aggression in Ukraine, instead pointing fingers at European allies, questioning their economic and military strength, and calling for the transfer of European defense responsibilities to Europe itself. Crucially, the document sets a vague goal of rebuilding strategic stability with Russia, which directly contradicts the President's own "Golden Dome" initiative.

The report further reveals major omissions in the new NSS regarding threats from Iran and North Korea. Unlike the 2017 NSS, which explicitly condemned North Korea's nuclear threats and Iran's support for terrorism, the 2025 NSS completely omits any mention of the threat from North Korea, not even including the country's name. Regarding Iran, there are inconsistencies within the document: the preface claims that Operation Midnight Hammer destroyed Iran's nuclear enrichment capability, while the main text only states it significantly degraded Iran's nuclear program.

Finally, the report assesses the potential unintended consequences of this strategic shift. It warns that the abrupt change in U.S. policy will further shake allies' confidence in American security commitments, casting doubt on the reliability and credibility of the United States as an ally. This could lead to narratives within Europe that the transatlantic alliance has ended, severely weakening the effectiveness of extended deterrence and increasing the risk of conflict. Any form of U.S. strategic retrenchment from Europe could trigger a chain reaction, emboldening expansionist forces, and ultimately endanger the extended nuclear deterrence system that has maintained peace in Europe for over eighty years. The analysis in this report is based on a word-for-word comparison of the two official strategic documents, aiming to provide policymakers and strategic analysts with a rigorous assessment framework to understand the fundamental changes in current U.S. national security strategy and their profound geopolitical implications.