U.S. Security Outlook 2025

December 23rd Commentary by Tony Aguilar 

In reading it, the hyperbole would make you think that the United States still believes it is in a good position to continue calling the shots. It starts out with the dubious claim that “over the past nine months, we have brought our nation and the world back from the brink of catastrophe and disaster.”

There is no doubt that America is still the most powerful nation, economically, militarily and culturally, but this is no longer a unipolar world as it was after the Cold War. China will soon be the world’s largest economy and has shown its willingness to stand up to the United States. This was proven to be the case as the administration capitulated when it came to China as it threatened to withhold certain rare earth elements.

There are aspects of the National Security Strategy that would be the goal of any sovereign nation. Protect the American people from terrorism, be prepared for war if needed, maintain a vibrant economy and lead the world in cutting edge technology are areas in which American’s can agree.

Unfortunately, some of the stated goals are contradictory and have been betrayed by the administration’s own actions. When it states that it has unsurpassed soft power, one has to question the termination of USAID. The Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health has reported that the shutdown has resulted in the unnecessary deaths of thousands of people.

Some of the agenda goals, however, such as to “deny non-hemispheric competitors, the ability to position forces or other threatening capabilities, or to own control, strategically vital assets in our hemisphere” might be problematic given China’s recent excursion into Latin America and the Caribbean. China is now the regions second largest trading partner. The administration’s critique of past administration’s decision of “encouraging American business to invest in China and outsourcing our manufacturing to China would facilitate China’s entry into the so-called rules based international order” is not entirely wrong. Nonetheless, If past administrations got it wrong about China, then the present administration has gotten it wrong about Russia.

When it comes to the western hemisphere, America’s military escalation against Venezuela, along with what some call interference by the United States in Honduras’s election, nations of Latin America would be right to be leery of what is being referred to as the Trump collorary.

Expecting other nations to assist them in preventing other nations from access to the western hemisphere, might be wishful thinking given the administration’s sometimes erratic behavior. Even nations such as Brazil, which is part of BRICS, has chosen to expand its options.

It is right to think of Africa from the perspective of investment. Unfortunately, disinviting the largest African economy, namely South Africa, to the upcoming G20 summit based on a false charge of genocide, and persecution takes away any credibility that goal might have had.

The term that has garnered a lot of attention from European capitals is civilization erasure. The term is geared towards Europe because of a belief that their immigration policies will lead to its ultimate decay. It reeks of Vice President JD Vance’s Munich Security Council speech, where he excoriated the leaders of Europe. The reaction to his speech was regarded by some as “ideological warfare.” He also intimated that America’s support would be contingent upon its support of free speech and political legitimacy. This is coming from the man who said, “When you see someone celebrating Charlie’s murder, call them out. And hell, call their employer."  Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, has referred to Europe as “freeloading” and “pathetic. ” The critique by Vance and others is not about free speech, but rather a refusal by European governments to endorse right wing parties such as the AFD in Germany. In fact, when it comes to free speech, America's ranking for free speech has gone from 3rd to 9th according to the Future of Free Speech at Vanderbilt University.

The patronizing and condescending approach to Europe is highly problematic. Even worse is the reason. As has become commonplace with the present administration, the problem is consistently laid at the feet of immigrants. The statement that Europe will not be the same in twenty years may be true, but it will not be because of immigration. The thought behind civilization erasure, intimates that Europe may not be a reliable partner, if it continues its present migratory trajectory.

Europe is not in danger of this so-called civilization erasure. This is simply a function of the American administration’s obsession with immigrants as it attempts to purify the American population.

It is perhaps time for Europe to end its sycophantic approach to this administration. While Europe needs and enjoys access to America’s thirty trillion-dollar economy, America also needs Europe’s twenty trillion-dollar economy and its supply chains.

The response to the National Security Strategy has ranged from Germany’s Chancellor Frederick Merz who said that some parts are “unacceptable to us from a European perspective. ”He went on to say “America first is fine, but America alone cannot be in your interest. You need partners in the world and one of those partners can be Europe.”

It is time for Europe to heed French President Emmanuel Macron’s call for independence from America. It should develop its own army that is not based on US technology. Germany has already began this process by changing its constitution to increase its defense spending. London’s member of Parliament, Seema Malhotra said “the prospect of United States interfering in the Democratic politics of Europe is I believe chilling.               But sometimes what is not said, is as important as what is said. In this case, the absence of a condemnation of Russia is extraordinary though not surprising.”

The idea of “ending the perception and preventing the reality of NATO as a perpetual expanding alliance” reeks of a desire to please the Kremlin. To do this the administration would have to convince Europe that Russia is not a threat but a potential partner. Given the administration’s affinity for Russia this is not a surprise. Given its history, it is a naive belief that Russia will not be a perennial threat to Europe.

Any reading of history would show that Russia over the last one hundred years has initiated a number of wars. Catherine the Great is alleged to have said “I have no way to defend my borders but to extend them.”

Europe does need to be more self-sufficient, not to be a reliable partner to the US, but in response to the fact that America itself is becoming a less reliable partner.

Whether because of strategic differences or the whims of a chaotic White House, it is time for Europe to seriously rethink what its relationship to America should be.

Becoming autarkic as it pertains to the US is not a realistic goal for Europe, at least in the short term. It is reasonable to expect Europe to become more self-sufficient while looking at other potential partners.

Even America’s closest neighbor, Canada’s Prime Minister Carney said “The world is changing, our adversaries are increasingly emboldened. International institutions and norms that have kept Canada secure are now being called into question, and the United States’ priorities, our ally – or United States priorities, once closely aligned with our own, are beginning to shift. ”

Artur Wilczynski, senior fellow at the University of Ottawa stated, “I think the United States has very clearly, and the president has very clearly indicated his desire to make Canada the 51st state. To believe they will not overtly or covertly try to achieve those outcomes would be irresponsible for Canada.”

More nations now view the US as a threat to their democracy. The reality is that many nations while not ignoring the US are beginning to look at other options.

Where the study is correct is that Europe may be different twenty years from now. The reason, however, is not necessarily because of immigration, but what may be an increased belief that the US is becoming a threat. Europe may be different because of its attitude towards America.

The National Security Strategy is an obvious but flawed attempt at maintaining American hegemony.

Given America’s saber rattling in recent months with Canada, Panama, Greenland, and now Venezuela, America may find itself isolated. They may find that as it promotes its National Security Strategy, the allies needed to bring this into reality may be reticent.