Explaining The Logic Behind The US’ Reported Draft National Defense Strategy

Policymakers are preparing for the worst-case scenario from their perspective, the US’ expulsion from the Eastern Hemisphere, hence their new goal of urgently achieving strategic autarky in the Americas.

Politico cited unnamed US sources to report in early September that the draft National Defense Strategy will radically break from its predecessors, including Trump 1.0’s own from 2018, by prioritizing the Western Hemisphere over containing China and Russia. If this grand strategic pivot makes it into the final version, which is likely since only comparatively minor points are usually changed during this process, then it would be accounted for by recent events in Eurasia prompting a sea change in US calculations.

To be sure, the US is still expected to pursue the containment of China and Russia, which can collectively be referred to as the Sino-Russo Entente. It’ll just be done more through proxy, AUKUS+ vis-à-vis China and NATO vis-à-vis Russia, than through direct measures like before. The predicted injection of Western influence into the geostrategic Central Asian region between them via NATO member Turkiye through the new TRIPP Corridor will complement the aforesaid measures to stir trouble for them on the cheap.

The US’ evolving modus operandi is to “Lead From Behind” by empowering regional partners through ISR aid, logistics support, and arms deals in order to advance shared geostrategic interests without risking another imbroglio for itself. The preexisting multipolar processes from before the special operation have accelerated in the 3,5 years since and consequently reached the point where a return to unipolarity is impossible even though complex multipolarity has yet to emerge and might still take decades to do so.

The Biden Administration’s “dual containment” of the Sino-Russo Entente failed while Trump 2.0’s Eurasian grand strategy of a resource-centric strategic partnership with Russia in order to deprive China of the resources required for turbocharging its superpower trajectory also just failed as explained here. Despite high hopes that the latter would succeed, the writing was on the wall in hindsight that Putin likely wouldn’t agree to major territorial and/or security concessions in Ukraine in exchange for such ties.

In parallel with the failure of these policies, the SCO and BRICS began playing more complementary roles in transforming global governance, beginning with the impressive diversification of some members’ economic-financial ties vis-à-vis the West since the start of Russia’s special operation. American strategists accordingly calculated that the restoration of unipolarity is impossible and more complex multipolarity might thus characterize the coming years so it’s time to prioritize the ultimate backup plan.

Focusing more on the Western Hemisphere than on directly containing the Sino-Russo Entente is meant to reverse the decline of the US’ unipolar hegemony in its half of the world. The goal is to reassert its traditional hegemonic status via the “Fortress America” strategy in order to dominate the Western Hemisphere’s resources and people, thus enabling the US to achieve strategic autarky should it be pushed out of the Eastern Hemisphere, however unlikely that possibility might appear to be at present.

The logic behind the US’ reported draft National Defense Strategy is therefore that policymakers are preparing for the worst-case scenario from their perspective, the US’ expulsion from the Eastern Hemisphere. This is due to them accepting that the multipolar advances of recent years are irreversible and that the cost of attempting to directly decelerate their future progress entails too high of a risk of world war. It’s a pragmatic approach but it remains to be seen whether it’ll really defuse global tensions.