• U.S. National Security Strategy under President Donald Trump explicitly revives the Monroe Doctrine, placing the Western Hemisphere at the center of U.S. foreign policy while reducing emphasis on Europe and global multilateralism. This marks a sharp pivot toward “America First 2.0,” combining economic nationalism with hemispheric dominance.
• The Monroe Doctrine:

• Origin (1823): Declared by President James Monroe, it warned European powers against further colonization or interference in the Americas.
• Cold War Adaptations: Used to justify U.S. interventions in Latin America against perceived communist threats.
• Modern Revival: Trump’s 2025 National Security Strategy (NSS) reinterprets it as a framework for securing the homeland by controlling the Western Hemisphere

• Restore U.S. preeminence by tying military, economic, and technological assets together for unmatched power.​
• End mass migration, secure borders as primary national security, and defeat cartels using lethal force if needed.​
• Promote U.S. economic growth to $40 trillion by 2030s via tax cuts, deregulation, and energy independence.
• Reassert and enforce Monroe Doctrine: Restore American preeminence in the Western Hemisphere after years of neglect, protecting homeland and key geographies.​
• Deny non-Hemispheric competitors: Block China, Russia, and others from positioning forces, threatening capabilities, or owning/controlling strategically vital assets (e.g., ports, mines, energy).​
• Enhance military/naval presence: Deploy superior Coast Guard/Navy to control sea lanes, thwart migration/drug trafficking, and secure transit routes in crises.​
• Targeted border deployments: Use military to secure borders, defeat cartels, and condition aid on rejecting foreign influence.​
• Guarantee U.S. access: Ensure access to critical locations like Greenland, Panama Canal, and resource-rich areas via superior forces.

• Prioritization of the Western Hemisphere: The U.S. has invoked a modern "Trump Corollary" to the Monroe Doctrine, reasserting dominance in the Americas to combat migration, drug trafficking, and external influence. This includes the largest troop mobilization in the Caribbean in decades.
• Deprioritizing European Security: The 2025 NSS signals a move toward ending the perception of NATO as a "perpetually expanding alliance" and shifts the burden of conventional deterrence entirely to European nations.
• Civilizational Critique: The strategy explicitly criticizes European allies, warning of "civilizational erasure" within 20 years due to migration and regulatory policies. It openly supports "patriotic" (far-right) populist parties as the preferred partners for future engagement.
• Pivot to the Indo-Pacific: The U.S. continues to view China as its "pacing threat," shifting advanced military assets to the Western Pacific to maintain "military overmatch" and deter conflict over Taiwan. 

• Transactional Diplomacy: International relations are treated as business deals rather than value-based alliances. Support for allies—including NATO members and Taiwan—is increasingly contingent on their defense spending and "repayment" for U.S. protection.
• Economic Nationalism: Tariffs have evolved into a primary diplomatic tool, used to force concessions from both adversaries like China and allies like Canada, Mexico, and the EU. The administration has pursued a "Trade War 2.0" to protect domestic industries.
• Pragmatic Realism vs. Idealism: The U.S. has largely abandoned the promotion of democracy and human rights abroad. It now favors "strategic stability" with autocratic leaders and avoids "hectoring" partners in the Middle East or elsewhere about their domestic politics.
• Burden-Shifting, Not Just Sharing: Beyond simply asking allies to spend more, the 2025 NSS demands they take "primary responsibility" for their own security. This has been notably applied to Europe, which the U.S. now views as an economic rival that must manage its own defense.
• Selective Interventionism: While retreating from "forever global burdens," the administration has aggressively asserted dominance in the Western Hemisphere. This includes invoking a "Trump Corollary" to the Monroe Doctrine to combat migration and drug trafficking through military mobilization and blockades.
• Personalized Leadership: Foreign policy is highly centralized and influenced by the president’s personal relationships and instincts, often resulting in volatile shifts between hostility and "peace-making" efforts. 

• Unipolar Moment (1991–2008)
  • After the Soviet Union collapsed, the U.S. emerged as the sole superpower.
  • It dominated militarily (NATO interventions, Iraq War), economically (globalization led by U.S. corporations), and ideologically (liberal democracy as the “end of history”).
  • This period was often called the “unipolar moment,” where no other state could challenge U.S. primacy.

• Signs of Decline
  • China’s Rise: Rapid economic growth, military modernization, and global influence through Belt and Road.
  • Russia’s Resurgence: Assertive foreign policy in Ukraine, Syria, and energy politics.
  • Europe’s Autonomy: EU seeking strategic independence, especially in defense and technology.

• Global South: Countries like India, Brazil, and Turkey asserting regional leadership.
• Domestic U.S. Strains: Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, financial crises, and political polarization weakened U.S. capacity to sustain global dominance.

• Power is now distributed among several major actors.
• The U.S. remains powerful but no longer uncontested.
• China and the U.S. form a bipolar rivalry within a broader multipolar system.
• Regional powers (India, EU, Russia, Brazil, Gulf states) shape outcomes in their spheres, making global governance fragmented.

• Economic Parity: While China’s GDP (PPP) surpassed the U.S. in 2014, recent assessments suggest its economic growth is "stalling" at approximately 16.5% of global GDP, compared to its 2021 peak of 18.5%.
• Military Expansion: China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) now possesses the world’s largest navy by ship count and is undergoing rapid modernization with a target of being "invasion-ready" for Taiwan by 2027.
• Technological Decoupling: Both nations have moved toward "self-sufficiency" in critical sectors like semiconductors, AI, and 5G, creating two distinct, competing technological ecosystems. 
• Strategic Anxiety vs. Assertive Confidence: The U.S. has shifted to a bipartisan policy of "containment" and "strategic rebalancing" in the Indo-Pacific, while China has moved from a low-profile foreign policy to a proactive, "agenda-setting" diplomacy under Xi Jinping.
• The Thucydides Trap: Analysts warn of the "Thucydides Trap," where a rising power’s growth creates fear in the established power, making war seemingly inevitable.
• Core Interest Conflicts: Taiwan remains the most volatile flashpoint, followed by maritime disputes in the South China Sea and competition over global trade rules through initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative.

• Dominance of the U.S.–China Rivalry (Bipolar Trait): While many countries have influence, the U.S. and China remain "separated from the pack" by a massive gap in economic and military capabilities. Their competition in technology (AI, semiconductors), trade, and military power projection creates a central axis—or a "dual-core system"—around which most global events revolve.
• Rise of Major Regional Powers (Multipolar Trait): Unlike the Cold War's rigid blocs, today’s order features multiple significant centers of power such as India, the European Union, Japan, Brazil, and Russia. These actors pursue "strategic autonomy," meaning they do not automatically align with either side but instead navigate between the two poles to protect their own national interests.
• Fluid Alliances and Hedging: The world is multipolar because alliance structures are no longer fixed. Middle powers frequently "hedge their bets" by partnering with the U.S. on security (e.g., the QUAD) while maintaining deep economic ties with China or energy partnerships with Russia.
• Decentralized Economic Influence: Global economic power has shifted away from Western dominance toward a more decentralized, multipolar distribution, largely due to the rapid growth of Asian economies.
• Russia as a "Swing" Power: Russia retains a unique status as a "great power" due to its nuclear arsenal and energy resources. Its ability to align with China while challenging the U.S.-led order paradoxically strengthens the bipolar dynamic (as a second bloc) while simultaneously acting as an independent, disruptive pole in a multipolar framework.
• Technological & Nuclear Stability: The existence of nuclear weapons and critical technological interdependencies creates a level of caution reminiscent of bipolar stability (deterrence), even as many more actors compete for influence in these same sectors. 

• Hedging as Strategy: Uncertainty in the global order pushes middle powers, including U.S. allies such as Japan and Germany, and independent actors such as India and Brazil, to hedge their strategic choices.
• Hedging is a strategy where states avoid fully aligning with any single central power. Instead, they spread risks and maximise options by cooperating with multiple powers simultaneously while keeping fallback alternatives open.

Download Pdf