Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • US-Israel-Iran
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • Western Hemisphere
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
  • Analysis
    • Research
    • Q&A
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / Grand strategy / Pros and Cons in the National Security Strategy
Grand strategy, Burden sharing, Europe and Eurasia, NATO

December 16, 2025

Pros and Cons in the National Security Strategy

By Daniel DePetris

No National Security Strategy is foolproof, and the Trump administration’s recently released paper is no exception. But it’s not a complete disaster either. One of the most refreshing aspects of the 2025 National Security Strategy is the elimination—or at least de-emphasis—of the phrase “rules-based international order,” referring to a set of rules, mores, and principles that all nations are purportedly expected to follow. In reality, all states will do what they must in order to strengthen their position and meet an ostensible security interest. This includes the United States, which often preaches about the sanctity of these rules despite being willing to sweep them under the carpet when the opportunity arises.
The bad news is that the strategy itself is often contradictory. Even as it relishes a “predisposition to non-interventionism,” it lambasts Europe’s domestic political processes and appears to endorse a policy of undermining the continent’s mainstream political parties. The document does not explain how this is supposed to assist the Trump administration in accomplishing its legitimate burden-sharing goals within NATO.

Read at War on Rocks

Author

Photo of Daniel DePetris

Daniel
DePetris

Fellow

Defense Priorities

More on Western Hemisphere

Op-edWestern Hemisphere, Mexico, Venezuela

Trump Is Getting His Way in Latin America. But Bully Tactics Have a Cost—and the Bill Is Coming Due

By Daniel DePetris

March 30, 2026

Q&AGrand strategy, Cuba, Western Hemisphere

Will U.S. pressure lead to regime collapse in Cuba?

By Daniel DePetris

March 27, 2026

In the mediaCuba, Western Hemisphere

¿Podría Cuba resistir una intervención militar de EE. UU.?

Featuring Daniel DePetris

March 24, 2026

Op-edCuba, Western Hemisphere

Pursue negotiations, not regime change, in Cuba

By Thomas P. Cavanna

March 18, 2026

Op-edCuba, Western Hemisphere

Trump’s Cuba strategy is straightforward. The outcome will be anything but.

By Daniel DePetris

March 15, 2026

Op-edCuba, Western Hemisphere

Trump can win in Cuba without regime change

By Daniel DePetris

March 10, 2026

Events on Grand strategy

See All Events
virtualGlobal posture, Grand strategy, Military analysis

Assessing the 2026 NDS: What comes next?

February 9, 2026
virtualEurope and Eurasia, Asia, Grand strategy

Assessing the 2026 NDS: Alignment with restraint?

February 9, 2026
virtualNATO, Alliances, Burden sharing, Europe and Eurasia, Grand strategy

Assessing the 2026 NDS: Will it usher in burden shifting?

February 9, 2026

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • Research
  • Experts
  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2026 Defense Priorities Foundation. All rights reserved.