Internal Contradictions in US National Security Strategy
National Security Strategy (NSS) of the United States, released by President Trump, intends to reform the miscalculations of past leaders and improve decades of Washington’s reach. The Trump administration, as per the document, promises respect for sovereignty, restraint and renunciation of protracted global involvement. However, upon closer examination, the 33-pager document is full of internal inconsistencies. In contradiction to NSS, which vows to pull back from taking global responsibilities and adopts the policy of non-intervention, the U.S. pressures other states through economic, military and political coercion.
Firstly, Trump highlighted non-intervention as the core principle of NSS, which states that the country should avoid foreign entanglements until its core national interests are at stake. Nevertheless, the strategy intrinsically opposes its own principles as the US intervenes, militarily, politically and economically, in other states’ affairs. Trump proudly claims that the U.S. not only destroyed Iran’s enrichment capability through military strikes but also resolved eight international conflicts. Moreover, the US mobilisation of aircraft carriers against a small country like Venezuela, which is already grappling with economic challenges, contradicts its policy of non-intervention.
Secondly, NSS criticises past American leaders for overstretching US power, which resulted in diminished US preeminence. The strategy claims that Trump has changed the direction by focusing on a more realistic foreign policy. Principally, if the US wants to reduce its reliance on military, it........





















Toi Staff
Sabine Sterk
Penny S. Tee
Gideon Levy
Waka Ikeda
Mark Travers Ph.d
Tarik Cyril Amar
Grant Arthur Gochin
Chester H. Sunde