2017 National Security Strategy Policy Analysis: Societal Impact
Hamza Demirel
CYSE425W
Edwin Wells IV
In the opening statements of President Trumps National Security Strategy, he reminds readers that he was elected to:
make America great again. I promised that my Administration would put the safety, interests, and well-being of our citizens first. I pledged that we would revitalize the American economy, rebuild our military, defend our borders, protect our sovereignty, and advance our values. (NSS, 2017, p. I).
This is a call to the state of mind that the American people had towards the political climate of the time. Strong political polarization and American Nostalgia were key in President Trumps campaign and election which directly drove his formation of the National Security Strategy. However, fulfilling campaign promises does not necessarily generate a positive outcome for situations like foreign politics.
The American population had a steeply declining trust in the US government and major corporations up to and after 2016 lead to a lack of faith with the people and policies of foreign affairs. This “polarization was definitely identifiable within the population where the followers of Donald Trump and opinion surveys showed strong skepticism toward established foreign policy priorities and positions involving American involvement in international affairs” (Olsen, 2021, p. 82). Also, while in office, President Trump severely weakened the State Department by cutting a large sum of experienced staff and thus limiting influence on foreign policies (Olsen, 2021, p. 85). Polarization and doubtful mindset of the population as well as limited experienced influence allowed President Trump to be in an unhindered position for pursuing unilateralist foreign policies.
Groups like evangelicals were part of the population that supported President Trump during his campaign and time in office. “Many white evangelicals saw Trump as the lesser of two evils” in a time when many of their beliefs were being challenged (Gorski, 2017, pp. 347-348). Such issues as contraceptive coverage, abortion, and gay marriage led religious conservatives to view an avenue that would lead to some form of anti-Christian movement (Gorski, 2017, pp. 339-340). Many of this group were also white Christian nationalists who believed that the white Christian nation was being muddied, corrupted, and infiltrated (Gorski, 2017, p. 348). This is just one example of an American population that supported President Trump and their views of American exceptionalism.
However, the nostalgia of American exceptionalism that comprises the National Security Strategy, especially in pillars II and III, hinders present situational intelligence. “Nostalgia relies on a false sense of history, and it encourages an inaccurate view of the present, both of which are bad for strategy” (Ashford et al., 2017, p. 24). President Trumps National Security Strategy does address challenges for the US like China and Russia however, these policies are built on an inaccurate assessment of the US current standing in the world arena.
China, discussed at length in the National Security Strategy, was the strongest competitor with the US both economically and technologically. The strong economic ties and interdependence used to be considered beneficial are now considered the “root of a problem that has major implications for US national security” (Foot & King, 2019, p. 48). This shift in view with China shaped the way policy was made and conducted ultimately leading to a trade war with China. “The Trump administration has failed to recognize that as Chinese technological advances continue to accelerate, U.S. commercial and military innovation will depend more than ever on collaboration with China” (Foot & King, 2019, p. 48).
We can see, with China as an example, that the security strategy was the start of foreign policy being made with more personal interests, financial interests, and long-term challenges not being addressed. Such an example of personal motivation is “withholding of Ukrainian military assistance in exchange for investigating the son of former Vice President Joe Biden is perfect evidence of such a personally motivated quid pro quo” (McIntosh, 2020, p. 382). Financially we can also see that Trump family interests benefited from the trade war that occurred during the unilateral policy establishments guided by the National Security Strategy. Long-term issues, such as climate change specifically, were left out of the National Security Strategy as well serving no guidance for such a critical issue in the future.
Overall, we can see that President Trumps document to help return America to a golden age was nothing more that nostalgia. Nostalgia that was fueled by polarized politics and nationalist prejudices. This form of American Exceptionalism influenced and shaped the National Security Strategy which inverted the way America had performed its foreign politics. As such it resulted in a costly trade war and set up a more difficult future in the name of personal interest.
References
Ashford, E., Itzkowitz Shifrinson, J. R., Hill, A., Buchanan, B., Cooper, Z., Rapp-Hooper, M., Medina, C., McGrath, B., & Deptula, D. A. (2017, December 21). Policy roundtable: What to make of Trump’s National Security Strategy. Texas National Security Review. https://tnsr.org/roundtable/policy-roundtable-make-trumps-national-security-strategy/#essay2
Foot, R., & King, A. (2019). Assessing the deterioration in China–U.S. relations: U.S. governmental perspectives on the Economic-Security Nexus. China International Strategy Review, 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42533-019-00005-y
Gorski, P. (2017). Why evangelicals voted for Trump: A critical cultural sociology. American Journal of Cultural Sociology, 5(3), 338-354.
McIntosh, C. (2020). The Trump administration’s politics of time: The temporal dynamics that enable Trump’s interests to determine American foreign policy. Time & Society, 29(2), 362-391. https://doi-org.proxy.lib.odu.edu/10.1177/0961463X20909048
NSS booklayout fin 121917 – the white house. Trump Whitehouse. (2017, December 18). https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/NSS-Final-12-18-2017-0905.pdf
Olsen, G. (2021). Donald Trump and “America first”: The road ahead is open. International Politics (Hague, Netherlands), 58(1), 71-89.