The recently launched National Defense Strategy (NDS-26) of the U.S. Department of War (DoW) claims that it wants peace, and to that end, U.S. Joint Forces should be ready to deter threats via effective homeland defense, while fighting and winning wars by an operational capacity that enables the U.S. to militarily intervene in even far-reaching areas directly from the homeland.
Operation Absolute Resolve (against Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro) and Operation Midnight Hammer (against Iran during the 12-day war) are given as examples of such operative capability in the Defense Strategy. The NDS-26 takes this position of strength, mostly revealing the power of U.S. conventional forces, not only as an objective to be achieved but also as a given reality of the U.S. Armed Forces. This reality makes Trump’s Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine possible, implying full access to and control over the Western Hemisphere, and leads American decision-makers to adopt an America First logic by rejecting isolationism.
The NDS-26 defines how the priorities of the National Security Strategy (NSS, December 2025) will be applied in defense and security planning. Within this context, four objectives are cited. There is no absolute hierarchy among these objectives, but without doubt, the most important strategic priority of the U.S. is to defend the homeland against threats. If you know the Trump administration’s mindset, defense starts with strong borders. The wildest threat of the time is coming from narco-terrorists and illegal aliens.
Washington claims that both Canada and Mexico have special responsibilities in this regard. According to the DoW, Canada also has a responsibility to defend North America against other threats, such as missiles that may come from the air or sea. Washington hopes that both Mexico and Canada will take these responsibilities seriously; otherwise, it implies that the U.S. will have to take the lead in defending North America and the Western Hemisphere. Although Washington appears confident about the U.S. Armed Forces’ conventional superiority, the DoW warns about certain other types of threats, such as nuclear, cyber, missile and unmanned vessel threats. In the document, the DoW refers to Russian and North Korean nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities, which could reach the U.S. homeland if effective defense and deterrence measures, such as the planned Golden Dome, a multilayered missile shield system for the U.S., are not in place. The NDS-26 also mentions the increasing military capabilities of China.
In this strategic environment, homeland defense is directly connected to the U.S. ability to maintain uninterrupted access to chokepoints in the Western Hemisphere, including Greenland, the Panama Canal and the Gulf of Mexico (also known as the Gulf of America). At the same time, the U.S. Defense Industrial Base (DIB) should be revitalized, modernized and developed. This is stated as one of the main objectives of the NDS-26.
Iran is not indicated as a threat, but the NDS-26 assumes that Tehran and its proxies are trying to reconstitute its conventional forces and may try to regain nuclear weapons. This statement is generally accepted as a warning message to Tehran while the Trump Administration has recently been weighing military options against Iran.
NDS-26 refers to Israel as a model ally. This does not seem an identity or ideology-based description, though. Israel’s forward defense capacity to constrain Iran and Iranian-backed groups like Hezbollah is praised, and it is cited as precedence to other U.S. allies and partners.
Washington appears confident that South Korea and Japan will adopt a similar model, based on conventional self-defense and deterrence capacity of the U.S. ally to neutralize the threat at the strategic regional theater by itself, with limited but critical U.S. assistance. This implies arms procurement and technology sharing provided by Washington and continuation of U.S nuclear deterrence in important strategic fields.
On the other side, Washington urges its European allies to develop strong conventional, as well as economic, defense and deterrence against Russia to negate any possibility of domination by Moscow over Europe. ın addition to that, Washington does not believe that Russia has the capacity to claim hegemony over the continent.
In NDS-26, neither China nor Russia is mentioned as a threat. However, the DoW indicates that Washington is closely observing their military capabilities. The NDS-26 follows in the footsteps of the NSS by asserting that maintaining the status quo based on the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific should be Washington’s main strategic aim. According to the document, the U.S. should secure this posture through deterrence by denial, especially along the first island chain, rather than by confrontation with China. The NDS-26 has been criticized harshly for not mentioning Taiwan. I believe this criticism is unnecessary, since Taiwan is located on the first island chain of the Pacific. However, the omission of Taiwan’s name can also be interpreted as a demonstration of U.S. decisiveness in adopting a de-escalatory strategy toward Beijing.
In short, the NDS-26 is not a peaceful document and it is certainly not a pacifist one, despite stressing the importance of realism and a pragmatic approach. It emphasizes strength, foremost the strength of U.S. conventional forces, and indicates a radical shift from nuclear deterrence toward an active and offensive defense logic.
