Devex: What the U.S. National Security Strategy says about global development
“The new United States National Security Strategy, released Monday, outlines a U.S.-centric development policy … [and] puts in writing what U.S. Agency for International Development Administrator Mark Green has been saying in speeches since he took the position: That ‘the purpose of U.S. foreign assistance should be to end the need for it,’ that U.S. foreign assistance will not promote dependency, and that it will prioritize working with countries, or ‘aspiring partners’ as it puts it, that are aligned with U.S. interests…” (Saldinger, 12/19).

The Hill: Trump tries ‘America First’ national security strategy
“…The 55-page document, drafted over the course of a year, places the United States in competition with ‘revisionist’ powers like Russia and China that want to realign the world in their interests while eroding American security and prosperity. ‘Whether we like it or not, we are engaged in a new era of competition,’ Trump said during a speech meant to outline the strategy…” (Williams/Fabian, 12/18).

New York Times: Trump Delivers a Mixed Message on His National Security Approach
“…The strategy — which administration officials said was drawn from speeches that Mr. Trump had delivered during the 2016 campaign and as president while at the United Nations and on trips in Europe and Asia — ranges widely and includes jihadi extremism, space exploration, nuclear proliferation, and pandemics. But it is animated by a single idea: that the world has been on a three-decade holiday from superpower rivalry; and it suggests that that holiday is now over…” (Landler/Sanger, 12/18).

POLITICO: Trump: U.S. can’t guard its interests abroad if it doesn’t ‘protect prosperity at home’
“…[I]n some cases the document seems at odds with Trump’s record. His State Department has been targeted for a cut of roughly 30 percent and is dealing with a raft of unfilled ambassadorships and other key diplomatic posts. But the new strategy says the U.S. ‘must upgrade our diplomatic capabilities to compete in the current environment.’ And while members of Congress and foreign diplomats have condemned Trump for undermining democratic norms and showing little regard for human rights issues, the strategy declares that ‘America’s commitment to liberty, democracy, and the rule of law serves as an inspiration for those living under tyranny.’ Those contrasts, and the nonbinding nature of the document, leave Trump critics skeptical that it is worth taking seriously…” (Samuelsohn/Crowley, 12/18).