Dec 5, 2025, 7:59 p.mDec 5, 2025, 7:59 p.m
US President Donald Trump with Defense Minister Peter Hegseth.Image: AP
With a new national security strategy, US President Donald Trump brands the current political landscape in the EU as a threat to American interests. Specifically, the 33-page document criticizes alleged democratic deficits and restrictions on freedom of expression. When it comes to migration, it is said that Europe’s economic decline is overshadowed by the danger of “civilizational extinction”. Germany is also mentioned by name and criticized.
The national security strategy is a central document in which the USA defines its foreign and security policy guidelines. Trump explains that previous strategies did not take into account the core national interests of the USA and placed the defense of other countries on the shoulders of the US population. The times when the United States “supported the entire world order like Atlas” are over. “America First” applies – the USA first.
German dependencies in sight
The criticism of European governments in their handling of the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine is strikingly sharp. Germany is explicitly mentioned as an example of growing dependencies: the Ukraine war had the effect of increasing Europe’s – and “especially Germany’s” – external dependencies. German chemical companies built huge plants in China and used Russian gas there that they could no longer get at home.
The Trump administration accuses European politicians of “unrealistic expectations” and a political blockade in the struggle for peace with Moscow. In several countries, unstable minority governments are in power, “many of which trample on the fundamental principles of democracy in order to suppress opposition.” A large majority of Europeans want peace, but this wish is hardly reflected in politics.
From Washington’s perspective, this makes it more difficult to restore stability on the continent – including a new “strategic stability with Russia”, which the document explicitly states as a goal. The text does not contain any critical words for the Kremlin as an aggressor in the war against Ukraine.
“Patriotic parties” in Europe should be strengthened
The text does not explicitly say which EU countries Trump is particularly targeting when it comes to Ukraine and freedom of expression. Chancellor Friedrich Merz (CDU) and his government coalition are likely to be among those addressed. Trump indirectly explains the fight to them by letting it be known that his country is committed to “real democracy” and “freedom of expression” and wants to strengthen those “patriotic parties” that could reverse Europe’s “loss of identity”.
The aim of American policy must be to put Europe “on the right course”. The nationalist Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, as well as the German AfD, are considered to be closely linked to the Trump administration.
There was immediate sharp criticism of the new strategy from Germany and other European countries. Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul said about the critical statements about freedom of expression that he “doesn’t believe that anyone needs to give us advice on this.” In Germany there are not only the state powers of the executive, the legislature and the jurisdiction, “but also rightly free media”. Ursula von der Leyen’s EU Commission also rejected the allegations against the EU.
A passage that caused concern in NATO circles in Brussels stated that the basic US policy for Europe should aim to “end the impression – and the reality – of an ever-expanding NATO.” This would mean an end to the current “open door” principle. When asked by the German Press Agency, the alliance initially did not want to comment on this point in the US strategy.
The main focus is on Latin America and Asia
At the same time, the document makes it unmistakably clear that the main focus of US security policy in the future should be in the “Western Hemisphere” – meaning migration from Latin America, the fight against alleged “terrorists” and cartels that bring drugs into the USA, as well as on asserting American interests in the region. It is noteworthy that which country remains unmentioned by name in this context, even though Trump recently turned up the temperature rhetorically: Venezuela.
Most of the pages in the document are otherwise devoted to Asia. It is said that the USA has misjudged China for decades. The relationship must be economically rebalanced and military deterrence in the Indo-Pacific strengthened in order to prevent a possible conflict. This is also part of Trump’s strategic approach: a “world’s leading, deadliest and most technologically advanced” military that is supposed to enforce American interests everywhere.
The Middle East plays a minor role
The Middle East, on the other hand, only plays a minor role in the new strategy – the chapter on the region is correspondingly brief. The area has lost its former strategic importance, especially because the USA is producing more of its own energy again, and many conflicts there pose fewer immediate dangers for the USA from the American perspective.
The document on Africa is even briefer: the Trump administration doesn’t even devote a whole page to the continent. Washington criticizes that US policy there has relied on development aid and the export of liberal values for too long. In the future, cooperation should focus on trade and access to African raw materials – and on partnerships with those countries that open their markets to US companies.
Lines of argument like in right-wing circles
The bottom line is that it is about external deterrence, the rigorous enforcement of American economic interests and a clearly defined picture of who belongs and who doesn’t.
The document strikes a tone that revives colonial ways of thinking from the 19th century. This is evident not only in the Africa passage, but also in formulations about Europe – the Trump administration is using lines of argument that are common in right-wing circles: the greatest dangers are migration, falling birth rates and a supposed “loss of national identity”.
Between the lines, a seemingly racist idea of belonging is cast into state strategy, for Europe as well as for the USA itself. Diversity should not play a role, while “Western identity” and social unity are seen as strengths. The promised “golden future” of the USA is based on “traditional families” and honoring “past achievements and heroes”. A critical examination of the darkest chapters of American history – such as slavery – is not part of this self-image. (sda/dpa)