Hello, this is Dr. Mary Trump — reaching out on behalf of Alex Vindman with an urgent message: American democracy and the rule of law is under threat.

Please know I don’t say this lightly. My uncle, Donald Trump, is using his powers to unleash a reign of terror and revenge against all of us. He is peddling dangerous conspiracy theories and threatening to nationalize our elections.

Florida Senator Ashley Moody is pouring gasoline on that fire. Ashley was put in the Senate to be an automatic rubber-stamp for my uncle’s agenda.

While thug militias attack citizens and tariffs push prices sky-high, Ashley has pushed the same dangerous conspiracy theories and helped rip healthcare away from millions of Americans.

This is unacceptable. We cannot sit on the sidelines while Republicans like Ashley Moody try to undermine our democracy. That’s why I am supporting Alex Vindman for Senate. Alex has stood up to my uncle before, and he’s ready to do it again in the United States Senate.

DONATE

I know we are facing some difficult times, but we cannot lose hope. I want you to imagine something.

Imagine waking up the morning of November 4th, 2026 — just a few months from now. You make your morning coffee and turn on the news:

“Patriot Alex Vindman defeats Trump-endorsed Ashley Moody for Florida’s Senate election.”

This headline would be an absolute nightmare at Trump HQ. Alex winning in Florida — in Donald Trump’s backyard — would be the ultimate rebuke of Trumpism and send a message that Americans are ready for change. Doesn’t that sound amazing?

We have the chance to make it happen. Alex recently launched his campaign for Florida’s Senate seat, and the momentum is stunning. He’s putting Florida on the map, and with enough support, he has a real opportunity to defeat one of Donald Trump’s most loyal supporters in the Senate.

That’s why it shouldn’t surprise us that the same special interests who support my uncle will spend millions to pummel Alex Vindman in attack ads. Alex is not taking a dime from corporate PACs, so the only way he can overcome that massive MAGA spending is with your support.

I am personally asking you to make a donation to Alex’s Senate campaign before his first FEC deadline. Alex has risked everything to defend our democracy, and I know he will do the same when we send him to the United States Senate.

DONATE

Thank you for your support,

Dr. Mary Trump

It’s only been about one month since I joined the race for Florida’s Senate seat, and the attacks are escalating. Take a look at this most recent one:

The Florida Republican Party just launched a new TV ad calling me “Vindictive Alexander Vindman” and saying I belong in prison. I’ll include the clip here if you’d like to watch.

Republicans are saying that I am vindictive because I chose to put our country’s national security above partisan politics.

Yes, really.

It’s quite rich. If Republicans want to see vindictive, all they have to do is look in the mirror.

Vindictive is President Trump holding aid for a foreign ally hostage, until they agreed to investigate a political opponent.

Vindictive is the president firing me for reporting his illegal phone call.

Vindictive is the president saying Democratic lawmakers — who all served in the military or intelligence community — should be punished “by death” after they released a video urging service members not to obey illegal orders.

Vindictive is Trump launching a retribution campaign against my brother — all because he demanded truth and accountability.

As you can see, our president has a pattern of vindictive behavior. Unfortunately, they chose the wrong person to mess with. I’m ready and eager to fight for what’s right.

While Trump was crying bone spurs to dodge the draft, I put my life on the line for the country. I served 21 years in the U.S. Army — and was wounded in Iraq — before Trump pressured me to end my service.

I’m not taking my cues from a guy that called our fallen soldiers “suckers” and “losers.”

***

Here’s something that Trump and his allies won’t tell you: They are scared.

Ever since I announced my campaign, we’ve put Florida’s Senate seat back on the map. Ashley Moody’s donors know that we have a real shot to win this race, which is why the attacks are already escalating.

But I’m not scared. I refuse to back down, but I need you with me in this fight.

My February end-of-month deadline is this Saturday, and we are slightly behind where we need to be in our fundraising. If you have a few dollars to spare, it would mean the world to have you on our list of grassroots supporters. You can donate here:

DONATE

Thanks for your support.

Alex Vindman

DONATE

P.S. One last thing on this ad…unfortunately, National Republicans can’t even do basic fact-checking right. In their first version, they put my twin brother Eugene in one of the clips instead. Yikes.

P.P.S. They make me look like a maverick and fighter ready to take anyone on to fight for what’s right! 🤣

Last week, a Democratic veteran won a stunning special election in a Texas Senate district that Donald Trump carried by 17 points. Democrat Taylor Rehmet was outspent 10-to-1 and still managed to upset the Trump-endorsed candidate in a ruby red district.

This is setting off massive panic alarms in the White House. Now, even Ron DeSantis is admitting how vulnerable Republicans are ahead of the November midterms.

Since Donald Trump retook office, his administration has worked to rip healthcare away from millions of Americans and raise costs through tariffs — all in an effort to enrich their billionaire friends.

Ashley Moody and Republicans have cheered this on every step of the way. They knew these policies were deeply unpopular, and they did it anyway.

Now, their actions are coming back to bite them. Now, accountability is coming for them. Who would’ve thought?

Republicans are already trying to paint this loss as a fluke, but this is just the latest example of what’s to come. Just last year, Florida Democrats massively overperformed in a pair of special elections, even flipping a county that voted for Trump by 19 points.

Republicans can ignore it all they want, but the signs are clear: Voters are angry, and every race is on the table. That leads us to Florida.

My Senate race in Florida is especially competitive. The attention and energy around this race has been amazing. And, our data shows that if I perform on the same level as these special elections, we have a clear path to defeating Ashley Moody and flipping Florida’s Senate seat. Many of you have followed me. You know I will work harder and fight harder to make sure we end the chaos, crush corruption, and cut costs.

Election experts agree: Within 48 hours of announcing my candidacy for U.S. Senate, Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball upgraded our chances of winning in Florida.

But it won’t be easy. MAGA knows that a loss here — in Donald Trump’s backyard — would be so devastating that they will spend whatever it takes to stop us. Ashley Moody will have access to Trump’s network of high-dollar donors to drown us out.

If we want to cut through the noise and get our message in front of Florida voters, then we need to build the largest grassroots fundraising program that Florida has ever seen. That’s why I am asking:

If you’re able, I am asking you to donate to my Senate campaign in Florida. I am not taking corporate PAC money, so I’m counting on a surge in grassroots donations to reach our fundraising goals.

DONATE

Thank you for reading this message, and for staying engaged.

Alex Vindman

👋 A timely message for our Substack readers: 🇺🇸

As Alex runs for the United States Senate, we wanted to take a moment and say thank you. We are so grateful to be in this fight with you to defend our democracy and end the chaos and corruption.

We know how critical your support is, which is why we try to keep these posts as substantive as possible. But today, we need to ask for your support.

If everyone reading this right now gave $5, and set up a monthly recurring contribution to the campaign, we would hit our quarterly fundraising goal. If you agree that it’s time for a new generation of leadership in the United States Senate, we are asking you to donate to Alex’s campaign today. Thank you.

MAKE A ONE TIME DONATION

Alexander Vindman is a former member of the United States Army. Use of his military rank, job titles, and photographs in uniform does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Army, the Department of Defense or any branch of the U.S. government.

This came after I testified for the House’s impeachment inquiry into Trump’s not-so-perfect phone call with Ukraine. The president of the United States tried to demand a foreign government investigate a United States citizen and political opponent.

I thought it was improper, so I reported it. We all know how the story played out.

The House of Representatives went on to impeach Donald Trump — only the third time in our nation’s history — for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.

We watched the impeachment trial play out in the Senate. After two weeks, the upper chamber acquitted Trump from both charges.

The day after, Trump packed the East Room with his allies and delivered an hour-long speech patting himself on the back for being exonerated. I’ll spare you the transcript of the speech — including when he called FBI officials “top scum” and “sleazebag” — but I think this part sums it up pretty well:

“It was evil. It was corrupt. It was dirty cops. It was leakers and liars. And this should never, ever happen to another President ever.”

— Donald Trump

Then, in his first act of revenge, Donald Trump fired me and reassigned my twin brother.

I risked everything by reporting that call. Six years later, I stand by that decision.

I knew the potential consequences of speaking out against the most powerful person in the world. But without hesitation, I still knew it was my duty to tell the truth and report the corruption.

When I joined the Army, I took an oath to defend our nation and its values. I served 21 years and was wounded in Iraq. I served at the Pentagon under presidents from both parties, putting our nation’s safety before politics.

The decision to report that call wasn’t for political gain. It was to protect our democracy. I believe I served my nation by helping expose corruption by the chief executive.

Donald Trump and his allies may try to attack me, but I’m not backing down from the fight against chaos and corruption.

That fight isn’t over. I’m ready to stand up for Floridians who are sick and tired of a rigged system and costs going up while DC politicians like Donald Trump get rich. That’s why I am running for the United States Senate.

If you are as fired up as I am to send a message to MAGA in Donald Trump’s backyard, then click here to make a donation to my Senate campaign. The election experts just upgraded our chance to flip Florida, and your donations will help us get the resources we need to win this race.

DONATE

Thank you,

Alex Vindman

Alexander Vindman is a former member of the United States Army. Use of his military rank, job titles, and photographs in uniform does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Army, the Department of Defense or any branch of the U.S. government.

According to CNN, the Department of Justice is ramping up their efforts to probe and target officials who investigated Donald Trump.

This comes just weeks after the president himself pressured officials to investigate his adversaries. Already, the president’s administration has attacked leaders like Senator Adam Schiff, Captain Mark Kelly, and Letitia James.

These attacks are disturbing and must be called for what they are: Blatant attempts to silence his opposition. This cannot be tolerated in a democracy. Unfortunately, this pressure campaign led by the president is not new.

In 2019, I witnessed it personally when he tried to extort our ally, Ukraine, into investigating his political rival. I reported that call — leading to Trump’s first impeachment and him ending my military service.

I’ve risked everything because I refuse to bow down to a wannabe tyrant. And as difficult as things may seem at the moment, we are not powerless.

It’s why I am running for the United States Senate, even when I know the president will do whatever it takes to defeat me. I still believe that democracy and the rule of law mean something in America. We need more people willing to stand up and fight for what’s right.

DONATE

I want to leave you with this quote from Jerome Powell. Powell serves as the Chairman of the Federal Reserve — an independent institution that handles our nation’s monetary policy.

The Department of Justice is currently pursuing a criminal investigation into Chairman Powell after he refused to obey the president’s demands. In a new statement, Powell spoke out about Trump’s attacks:

On Friday, the Department of Justice served the Federal Reserve with grand jury subpoenas, threatening a criminal indictment related to my testimony before the Senate Banking Committee last June. That testimony concerned in part a multi-year project to renovate historic Federal Reserve office buildings.

I have deep respect for the rule of law and for accountability in our democracy. No one—certainly not the chair of the Federal Reserve—is above the law. But this unprecedented action should be seen in the broader context of the administration’s threats and ongoing pressure….

The threat of criminal charges is a consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the President.

This is about whether the Fed will be able to continue to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions—or whether instead monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation.

I have served at the Federal Reserve under four administrations, Republicans and Democrats alike. In every case, I have carried out my duties without political fear or favor, focused solely on our mandate of price stability and maximum employment. Public service sometimes requires standing firm in the face of threats. I will continue to do the job the Senate confirmed me to do, with integrity and a commitment to serving the American people.

It’s on each and every one of us to take up the fight.

Thank you for joining me in this fight. Together.

Alex

Alexander Vindman is a former member of the United States Army. Use of his military rank, job titles, and photographs in uniform does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Army, the Department of Defense or any branch of the U.S. government.

☀️ Hello, before you click away... 🌴

Lt. Colonel Alex Vindman (Ret.) just announced his campaign to flip Florida’s Senate seat blue. Alex is ready to take the fight straight to Donald Trump’s backyard…but he needs your help to win.

If everyone reading this post chipped in just $3, we could mobilize persuadable Florida voters and put a check on Trump’s tyranny. If that sounds worth it to you, please chip in $3 today. Thank you.

DONATE $3

DONATE ANOTHER AMOUNT

Thank you all for joining Rachel and I for my first Substack Live since the launch of my Senate campaign. Our conversation covered the call to service during times of crisis and uncertainty, Rachel’s recent post describing her initial response to my candidacy, and my campaign’s vision for the great state of Florida.

My message? End the Chaos, Crush Corruption, Cut Costs!

DONATE

DONATE

Tonight at 6:00pm ET I will be going live on Substack and speaking on the past week of campaigning and the election ahead of us. I’ll also be highlighting my vision for the people of Florida and how I will be addressing the concerns of the voters of this great state. Be sure to tune in via the Substack app or in your desktop browser.

DONATE

I look forward to speaking with you all tonight,

It’s Rachel Vindman. This week my husband, LTC (Retired) Alexander Vindman, launched his campaign for U.S. Senate.

When he first talked to me about running, I said no. Actually, I said a lot of words I will not repeat here and then a loud and emphatic no. I said no for many months.

I said no because I knew what it would mean for our family, for our daughter, and for the life we have built brick by brick since Alex testified in 2019 and was fired from the White House the day after Trump’s first impeachment trial ended.

I know this will put us back on Trump’s radar, and I am all too familiar with how that works. I know what’s coming: the attacks, the lies, the death threats, the flood of comments about my appearance and weight. Super fun stuff. I know it will be exhausting and overwhelming. I know they will come after us personally. I know it will be awful, and I also know it will somehow still be worse than I am imagining.

But, knowing all of this, let me tell you why I said yes… And why I am asking for you to donate to Alex’s Senate campaign today.

Donate to the campaign here

Alex running for office was never part of our plan. But neither was living in a country where an immoral president openly puts himself, his family, and his wealthy friends ahead of everyone else. Neither was watching an appointed senator rubber-stamp policies that hurt the very community we love, without pushing back, without standing up, without asking hard questions.

Yet ***looks around in disbelief*** here we are.

During the impeachment, when everything felt heavy and uncertain, our rabbi reminded us of the words of Rabbi Hillel: “If not me, then who? And if I am only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?”

Those words have stayed with me. Especially the uncomfortable question that asks: If you have the ability to act, but you choose not to, what does that say about you?

Florida is our home. It is the only place in our entire marriage where we consciously chose to live, and we did that with intention. We came here to build a life, and it has been wonderful! Our daughter is thriving! We have strengthened old friendships, built new ones, and become part of a culturally rich and diverse community. I have truly never been happier, and I did not want to lose that. But loving a place also means being willing to fight for it when it is not being served well.

For Alex and me, this is not about ambition or power. This is about not wanting to look back and think we could have done more when it mattered. It is about choosing to stand up for what is right, right now.

I did not say yes because I suddenly felt brave or because my fears disappeared. I said yes because this moment demands more from all of us.

And somewhere along the way, I realized I had been asking myself the wrong question.

Instead of “Do I want my husband to run for Senate?” I finally asked myself something harder and more honest: If now is not the time to step up, when would be?

In life there will never be a perfect moment. There will always be a reason to wait. There will always be a reason to tell yourself that someone else will do it, or that the timing is not right. And if we keep waiting for a moment that feels safe or convenient, we will be waiting forever…and eventually it will be too late.

So I said yes, not because it was easy and not because I wanted this life, but because I could not look at the moment we are in and pretend it was not asking something of us.

And I hope more people start asking themselves the same question. Running for office isn’t something everyone needs to do, but we all need to show up in whatever way we can. Speak up. Get involved. Refuse to sit out this moment.

That’s why I said yes and I hope you will also.

That can look like a lot of things. It can mean donating what you are able. Signing up to volunteer. Making sure everyone you love is registered to vote and signed up to vote by mail. It can mean having the uncomfortable conversation, canvassing, driving someone to the polls, or simply refusing to be quiet when something is not right.

ARE YOU READY? LET’S DO THIS!

Donate to the campaign here!

I had the pleasure of joining Lawrence O’Donnell on MS NOW for the launch of my U.S. Senate campaign. I wanted to share a clip that really stuck with me.

I saw firsthand Donald Trump trying to undermine U.S. security for his own gain. We cannot allow chaos and corruption to define America’s role in the world or betray our allies who fight for their freedom.

In a moment as important as ours, we cannot afford to be silent. I want Americans — Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike — to make their voices heard.

Thank you for watching, and please take action.

Alexander S. Vindman

Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army (Retired)

DONATE

Alexander Vindman is a former member of the United States Army. Use of his military rank, job titles, and photographs in uniform does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Army, the Department of Defense or any branch of the U.S. government.

Yesterday, I launched our campaign for the United States Senate in Florida. I had no doubt in my mind that folks were fired up to take the fight straight to MAGA in Donald Trump’s own backyard.

…But to be quite honest, the support we’ve gotten in these first 36 hours has left me stunned.

Our campaign just set the record for the best Day One amount raised for a Senate candidate in Florida. More than 30,000 supporters have joined this team by chipping in a donation, with 99% of our online contributions being $100 or less.

That is incredible, and it shows the clear contrast in this race: While Ashley Moody relies on billionaire donors to rescue her campaign, we are building a movement that’s powered by the people.

It looks like the opposition is taking note too. Just look at what Ashley Moody sent to her supporters:

It’s only Day One, and they’re already trying to fearmonger their base against me. “Partisan witch hunt,” “impeachment hoax” — you name it.

Even Laura Loomer, one of Donald Trump’s most loyal attack dogs, spent her day attacking me on Twitter. It’s only a matter of time until the president himself comes after our campaign, just like he’s done against me before.

The Senate majority hinges on Florida and in a single day, we’ve already put Florida back on the map for Democrats. But now is when the real work begins. Republicans know that a win here would be a devastating blow to Donald Trump, so they are going to throw everything including the kitchen sink at me.

This will be a very tough fight, but I refuse to give in. I am ready to fight like hell for the soul of this country, which is why I’m asking for your support.

I know my campaign has sent you quite a few emails already — so before anything else, I want to thank you. Florida is an expensive state to campaign in, and the only way we will be able to match the money coming from Ashley Moody’s backers is with your support.

So while you probably didn’t wake up thinking you would make a donation to my campaign, that is the ask I have of you today. Your early donations will help us reach the voters we need to win in Florida and put a check on authoritarianism.

DONATE

Together, we will end the chaos, crush corruption, and cut costs for our families.

Thank you again for your support. More soon.

Alex Vindman

Alexander Vindman is a former member of the United States Army. Use of his military rank, job titles, and photographs in uniform does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Army, the Department of Defense or any branch of the U.S. government.

That’s what I said to Congress at an impeachment hearing against the President of the United States.

I never intended to be in the national spotlight. I joined the Army and served for 21 years because I wanted to fight and defend the country I love. I could have never expected that it would lead me to testify against the President of the United States.

That is, until I heard the president try to extort a foreign country into investigating a political rival — a quid pro quo.

I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. It was my duty to report the corruption.

I knew that I was assuming a lot of risk by challenging the most powerful person in the world. There was no doubt that he was going to use everything in his power to retaliate, just as he’d done to his opponents in the past.

But I had confidence that I could tell the truth. I knew that this is America — and here, right matters.

A lot has happened since that day in 2019. President Trump exacted his revenge by firing me and calling me “human scum.” He tried to incite an insurrection to hold onto power after losing a fair election. Now, he is using his powers in office to inflict violence on American citizens.

Amidst all of this I still believe that right matters.

Our country has lived through challenging periods in the past but we’ve overcome, persevered, and moved towards a more perfect union.

We are in the middle of another fight for our country right now. I still have faith that good can prevail over evil and that we can overcome these hard times. What is right still matters here…but only if we make it matter.

That’s why I have decided to run for the United States Senate in Florida. We are taking the fight straight to Donald Trump in his own backyard. A win here will deliver Democrats control of the Senate.

We just launched our campaign this morning and I couldn’t be more grateful for the outpouring of support across Florida and the country. It’s through your support that we can build a winning campaign.

If you are fired up to win back the Senate majority and finally hold an out-of-control president accountable, then it would be an honor to have your support as a Founding Donor.

Donate

I came to the United States as a child when my family fled tyranny. I know how fragile democracy is and I’m ready to continue the fight in the Senate.

For our families, for our community, and for our country. Thank you.

- Alex

Alexander Vindman is a former member of the United States Army. Use of his military rank, job titles, and photographs in uniform does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Army, the Department of Defense or any branch of the U.S. government.

In 2019 I found myself at the heart of a constitutional crisis. I listened as the president of the United States tried to extort Ukraine into investigating a political rival for his own personal benefit.

I honored my oath by blowing the whistle on the Trump-Ukraine phone call, an act that led to the president’s first impeachment and ultimately ended my military career.

Share

People told me to keep my head down, but as the son of a family that arrived in America to escape tyranny, I sure as hell wasn’t going to bow down to a wannabe tyrant.

I testified before Congress to stand up for our democracy and the Constitution that I swore to protect. This led to the president unleashing a reign of terror and retribution not just against my family and I, but against all of us.

Today, our country is in chaos. We are entering a dark chapter of American history, one that echoes early stages of authoritarian power consolidation seen elsewhere.

Thug militias are attacking citizens. Needless tariffs are pushing prices sky-high. Healthcare premiums are through the roof.

Meanwhile, my opponent is hand-picked by MAGA and their billionaire allies to be a rubber stamp for their radical agenda. Ashley Moody screwed Florida homeowners by caving to the big insurance companies, supported this administration that gutted disaster help for communities trying to rebuild, and had over a million dollars in her corporate stock traded last year while she had access to insider information only Congress gets.

She’s not Florida’s senator. She’s theirs.

Trump may have ended my military service, but he will never shake my commitment to this country.

That is why I have chosen to run for the United States Senate in Florida. We need a Senator who isn’t afraid to defend our democracy, put a check on an outlaw president, and ensure that every American has a fair chance at prosperity.

As we get this campaign started I hope you will consider becoming a Founding Donor today or becoming a member of this team. Let’s send a message that we are ready for a new generation of leadership in Washington by flipping Florida’s U.S. Senate seat and delivering Democrats the Senate majority.

DONATE

I stepped up when our country needed a soldier. I stood up when someone had to say no one’s above the law. I am asking you to stand with me now.

Florida will be one of the most important Senate races in the coming midterm elections. The billionaires and special interests will throw everything they’ve got to try and stop us. But in the infantry, we never backed down from a fight — we went towards it.

Join me.

- Alex Vindman

DONATE

Alexander Vindman is a former member of the United States Army. Use of his military rank, job titles, and photographs in uniform does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Army, the Department of Defense or any branch of the U.S. government.

The glovebox of Renee Good’s car following her death

Legitimacy and accountability are inseparable. In a democracy, law enforcement derives its authority not from weapons or uniforms, but from adherence to the law, internal discipline, and the confidence of the public it serves. When accountability disappears, legitimacy collapses—and what remains is not law enforcement, but coercive force directed at a civilian population.

That is the context in which Americans must understand the killing of Renee Nicole Good in Minneapolis, Minnesota, on January 7, 2025.

ICE agents initiated an armed confrontation with a driver during what appears to have been a chaotic and poorly controlled encounter. The publicly released footage does not capture the moments leading up to the stop, but the seconds before the shooting show armed agents aggressively surrounding a visibly anxious driver while issuing conflicting commands. When the driver attempted to leave the scene, apparently maneuvering away from the agents rather than toward them, an ICE agent fired into the vehicle, killing her.

Renee Good was a mother. She was the only person injured in the incident.

After the shooting, one ICE agent fled the scene. Other agents reportedly prevented a bystander—who identified himself as a physician—from rendering medical assistance. These actions alone raise grave questions about training, discipline, and adherence to basic law-enforcement protocols.

Under normal circumstances, such an incident would trigger the immediate suspension of the involved officers, removal from active duty, and a full, independent investigation.

That is not what happened here.

President Trump and senior administration officials moved with remarkable speed to exonerate the shooter. Trump publicly characterized Good as a “professional agitator” who had “violently, willfully, and viciously” attacked an officer, framing the killing as self-defense. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem echoed that conclusion.

This rapid political exoneration occurred despite contradictory facts. Local authorities confirmed that Renee Good was the only person harmed. Her family has stated that she was not participating in any protest or anti-ICE demonstration, but had just returned from dropping off her six-year-old daughter at school. The available evidence has not been subjected to an independent review, yet the administration declared the matter closed, casting a shadow over the prospect of a fair federal investigation before one could even begin.

This response is not an aberration. Across the country, ICE agents have increasingly engaged in provocative, escalation-driven encounters rather than de-escalation. The pattern bears the hallmarks of top-down encouragement to act aggressively. Training in use-of-force discipline and crisis management appears inadequate. Most dangerously, agents operate with the confidence that political leadership and right-wing media will shield them from consequences, regardless of the outcome. That sense of impunity is corrosive and deadly.

When a federal law-enforcement agency exempts itself from its own rules, disregards established investigative procedures, treats lethal force as presumptively justified, and flouts the law, it forfeits its legitimacy. At that point, reform is no longer optional; it becomes a public-safety imperative.

The consequences of this killing extend far beyond Minneapolis. By closing ranks and absolving the shooter, the administration has sent a clear signal: escalation will be rewarded, not punished. Deadly force against civilians will be excused if it serves political objectives.

Rather than calling for restraint, unity, or a fair investigation, Vice President J.D. Vance took directly to social media to reassure ICE agents that the administration is there for them. This was an unmistakable signal that accountability will not come from within the White House or federal government. Justice may only come, if at all, from State authorities. Vance followed this with an additional post calling Renee Good a “deranged leftist” and repeating the demonstrably false claim that she attempted to ram ICE agents with her vehicle.

Vance is the deranged provocateur.

Vance, who has shown throughout his political career a willingness to subordinate principle to power, stooped lower still: maligning a dead woman, amplifying disinformation, and serving as a megaphone for division, hatred, and violence.

This moment matters because it fits a broader and deeply alarming pattern. President Trump has repeatedly demonstrated a preference for personal loyalty over institutional restraint. ICE, increasingly militarized and insulated from oversight, is becoming something closer to a personal force than a civilian law-enforcement agency. Its activities now extend well beyond immigration enforcement, appearing increasingly focused on inflaming protests and intimidating communities. The prospect of ICE interference at polling locations or in future democratic processes is no longer theoretical.

The predictable response from communities across the country has been public protest against federal law-enforcement abuses. ICE, in turn, has responded not with restraint but with escalation—normalizing the use of force against protesters and accelerating confrontations rather than defusing them. This pattern is dangerous by design: repeated clashes create the very conditions that can be cited to justify deploying the military domestically.

We are entering a dark chapter of American history, one that echoes early stages of authoritarian power consolidation seen elsewhere. The militarization and expansion of ICE bears troubling resemblance to developments in Putin’s Russia, where security forces were fused into the “Rosgvardia” paramilitary force and placed under direct presidential control. That force has since been used to crush dissent at home and terrorize civilians in occupied territories abroad. Just as Rosgvardia answers to Putin, ICE increasingly operates beyond meaningful restraint, formally housed within DHS, but functionally responsive to presidential vendettas.

An America in which the powerful can wield lethal force against the public without consequence is not a democracy. It is not the rule of law, but rule by law enforcement. It is a country governed by fear.

This killing cannot be buried by executive fiat. Minnesota authorities must conduct a full, independent investigation and pursue accountability under state law. Justice must be served. Failure to do so would place not only Minneapolis, but communities across the country, at greater risk.

I call on all Americans of conscience to demand accountability. Citizens cannot be killed and those killings shielded by the badge of law enforcement. Justice for Renee Nicole Good is not only about one family’s loss. It is about whether the rule of law still applies to those who carry a weapon in the name of the state and whether democratic accountability can still restrain power when it turns lethal.

Nicolás Maduro in Custody Aboard the USS Iwo Jima

At 1:00 a.m. ET on January 3, the United States military launched a daring raid into Caracas that resulted in the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. A helicopter carrying U.S. special operations forces descended on Maduro’s residence as American aircraft and naval assets disabled air defense systems and provided suppressive fire. Maduro and his wife were positively identified by U.S. forces, taken into custody, and transferred aboard the USS Iwo Jima off the Venezuelan coast. The operation lasted less than an hour, resulted in no American casualties, and culminated in the exfiltration of one of the United States’ principal adversaries in Latin America.

Operation Southern Spear was, by any tactical measure, a near-flawless success. However, this mission is already revealing itself as a strategic gamble - one that risks producing instability, weakening international norms, and burdening the United States with responsibilities it appears unprepared to manage.

For several months, this Substack has covered the military buildup off Venezuela’s coast and throughout the Caribbean. Shortly after the arrival of the first carrier strike group led by the USS Gerald R. Ford, I operated under the assumption that the Trump administration had already committed itself to regime change in Venezuela and that it was only a matter of time before a major military operation followed. According to details provided by General Caine earlier today, that assessment appears correct. The raid was planned well in advance and hinged on a series of variables aligning (most critically weather conditions and Maduro’s precise location) before execution was authorized. Given the composition of forces assembled off Venezuela’s coast, primarily a single Marine Expeditionary Unit, there was little prospect for a large-scale or sustained military campaign. Instead, U.S. air and naval power, combined with a Marine force supporting elite special operations units, enabled a tightly executed surgical strike to capture Maduro. At the time of writing, Maduro and his wife are en route to the Southern District of New York to face charges brought by the Department of Justice.

The more consequential question is what follows. In his first public remarks after the raid, President Trump declared, “we are going to run the country now,” while simultaneously referencing the return of American energy companies to Venezuela. What this means in practice remains dangerously unclear. Does the administration intend to impose a provisional government administered by the U.S. military, akin to the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq? Will Maduro’s governing apparatus remain intact, with Washington simply anointing a successor? Trump has already dismissed Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado, claiming she lacks the support or respect to govern—a judgment that appears less rooted in Venezuelan political realities than in Trump’s hostility toward democratic outcomes and personal resentment of Machado’s Nobel Peace Prize. Meanwhile, Venezuela’s vice president has reportedly fled to Russia, demanding Maduro’s release and declaring that Venezuela “will never be a colony of any other nation.” These signals suggest that remnants of the Maduro regime are unlikely to acquiesce to unilateral American dictates. If the administration sidelines Venezuelan political actors entirely, the United States will inherit not only the task of governance, but also the immense financial burden of rebuilding Venezuela’s shattered economy and infrastructure.

It is also unclear whether this operation meaningfully degraded the broader ecosystem that sustained the Maduro regime. Despite the regime’s failure to defend Maduro during the raid, the senior leadership of the Venezuelan military appears largely intact. There is no evidence that the operation targeted the leadership of Tren de Aragua or other regime-aligned non-state actors. While these groups pose little conventional threat to U.S. forces, they retain the capacity to destabilize post-Maduro Venezuela through criminal violence or to carry out reprisal attacks against civilian targets. Tactical decapitation alone rarely dismantles the systems that keep authoritarian regimes alive.

The energy dimension of this operation deserves separate consideration. The seizure and reopening of Venezuela’s oil sector could flood global markets, lower prices, and reduce revenue streams for Russia—particularly as Moscow continues to finance its war in Ukraine. This effect, while real, should not be overstated. Any economic pressure placed on Russia through energy markets does not offset the broader strategic and normative damage inflicted by the method used to achieve it. Economic leverage gained through coercive regime change carries costs that extend well beyond oil prices.

Those costs are already apparent in the global response. Venezuela has long exported oil to China and aligned itself economically with both Beijing and Moscow. The sudden removal of a client state in Latin America may incentivize both powers to seek compensatory leverage elsewhere, including through escalatory actions in Ukraine, increased pressure on Taiwan, or more aggressive posturing across the Global South. At the same time, prolonged instability in Venezuela risks triggering a refugee crisis that would strain neighboring states such as Brazil and intensify pressures at the United States’ southern border.

Most consequential is what Operation Southern Spear signals about the future of U.S. foreign policy and the precedents it sets. The forcible removal of a sitting head of state, seizure of national infrastructure, and assertion that the United States will “run the country” mark a clear abandonment of even the pretense of adherence to a rules-based international order. While Russia’s failed attempt to decapitate the Ukrainian government in Kyiv was undertaken for purposes of conquest and subjugation—and the United States claims to be acting under the banner of law enforcement—the precedent of unilateral regime removal by force matters. Methods shape norms, and norms shape behavior. In this case, Washington has weakened its standing to condemn similar actions by authoritarian powers.

That erosion is compounded by the absence of congressional authorization. The operation was conducted without an Authorization for Use of Military Force, despite months of visible military preparations that prompted repeated calls for legislative oversight. Secretary of State Rubio has argued that congressional involvement risked operational leaks. That justification is thin. What matters most is not this operation alone, but the precedent it sets for unilateral uses of force by future presidents of either party absent democratic accountability.

Today’s mission represents the “Trump Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine”—the so-called “Donroe Doctrine”—in full effect. The United States has achieved a decisive tactical victory, but now faces a far more complex strategic environment. Failure to manage Venezuela’s transition credibly will deepen instability, inflame regional resentment, and invite opportunistic behavior from China, Iran, and Russia. Without a legitimate political transition, international backing, and congressional accountability, Operation Southern Spear may ultimately be remembered not as the liberation of Venezuela, but as the moment the United States openly abandoned the constraints that once distinguished it from the very regimes it opposes.

Dear readers,

Happy New Year! 2025 concluded with a series of developments that, taken together, reveal a defining pattern: U.S. retrenchment paired with transactional coercion abroad, institutional confusion at home, and accelerating pressure on the post-war global order. From Europe and Ukraine to Venezuela and Taiwan, allies are adjusting to an America that no longer provides strategic clarity while adversaries probe for advantage amid Washington’s inconsistency.

Below is a review of the most significant global events over the past month and why they matter.

National Security Strategy

In early December, the White House released the United States National Security Strategy (NSS). As covered in my Substack pieces published shortly after its release, the document represents a major shift in the United States’ approach to foreign policy and geopolitical posturing. The two central concepts advanced in the strategy are a refocusing of American political interests on the Western Hemisphere and the use of “flexible realism” as a guiding framework.

Additionally, the NSS outlines U.S. interest in supporting so-called “patriotic parties” in Europe as a means of undermining the effectiveness of the European Union and raises questions about the defensibility of Taiwan in the absence of greater burden-sharing between the United States and its allies in the Asia-Pacific.

Why it Matters: After a year of transactional, self-serving, and erratic decision-making—paired with specious claims of “peacemaking” and supposed foreign-policy wins—the NSS should be viewed less as a governing blueprint than as a theoretical framework frequently at odds with President Trump’s executive behavior. It is best understood as an encapsulation of the worldview and strategic objectives of Trump’s innermost circle. Time will tell whether this framework prevails within the national security apparatus. More likely, Trump’s impulses and a preference for short-term transactional diplomacy will continue to dominate.

Russia and Ukraine

December delivered continued attrition warfare. While Russia achieved limited territorial gains alongside notable setbacks, the overall trajectory further confirmed that Ukraine retains greater staying power in the conflict.

Read more

Dear Readers,

What a year! As 2025 comes to a close I wanted to take a moment and reflect on the past year of posts from Why it Matters. Between long-form deep dives on the challenges facing our country, monthly security briefings covering the challenges seen across the world, and lightning-fast reflections on political crises and conflict, we’ve doubled our readership. Thousands of you have tuned into my streams and joined me and a roster of guests for discussions on current events and Why it Matters. I wanted to thank each and every one of you for joining me on this journey in these uncertain times.

I’m sure you’ve noticed there’s been a bit of silence on my end - don’t worry, all is well, we are just planning some major things in the coming year.

Below is a list of articles published in 2025 that cover a variety of topics and policy areas that may be of interest. Older posts on this substack are archived and accessible to paid members. To read the entries below, be sure to upgrade your membership from free to paid member.

My Speech at the Cooper Union

In March I had the opportunity to speak to an audience at the Cooper Union in NYC on Rebuilding the American Dream. This speech included reflections on the necessity of moral courage in times of crisis, the need to defend and uphold the American Dream, and a call to action for the American electorate to channel their energies towards civic engagement.

On AI And National Security Work

The development of Artificial Intelligence has major impacts on work and labor across the United States - including the field of national security. This piece examines how national security professionals must navigate the immense changes brought about by the development of AI technologies as well as how AI may impact counterintelligence and attack surfaces.

Why It Matters

On AI and National Security Work

Dear readers…

Read more

6 months ago · 77 likes · 6 comments · Alexander Vindman

A Statement on National Security Staff Firings

In January Trump’s National Security Advisor Mike Waltz announced a mass termination of senior national security staffers serving in apolitical advisory roles. This was reportedly a precaution to prevent any possibility of dissent and dissuade potential whistleblowers from uncovering Trump’s corruption. This has been known as the “Vindman Rule” and signals just how concerned the current administration is with civil servants placing their duty to the constitution over personal loyalty to Trump.

Unraveling Spider’s Web

Using a network of delivery trucks, quadcopter UAVs, and months of meticulous planning, the Ukrainian military launched a daring operation to disable Russia’s nuclear bomber fleet. “Unraveling Spider’s Web” examines the scope and scale of this operation and the lasting damage to Russia’s nuclear capabilities in the aftermath of this mission.

Why It Matters

Unraveling “Spider’s Web”

A Tu-95 burns at Olenya airbase in Murmansk, Russia…

Read more

10 months ago · 169 likes · 5 comments · Alexander Vindman

The Dark Age of American Intelligence

The second election of Donald Trump saw the appointment of Tulsi Gabbard to Director of National Intelligence. Gabbard has historically repeated narratives presented by America’s adversaries and upheld half-truths and distortions propagated by the regimes of Vladimir Putin and Bashar al-Assad. In February, I examined how her appointment would contribute to a decrease in intelligence sharing between the United States and our allies.

Why It Matters

The Dark Age of American Intelligence

As of this past Wednesday, Tulsi Gabbard is officially the Director of National Intelligence…

Read more

a year ago · 541 likes · 9 comments · Alexander Vindman

Situation Report: Kursk

The Ukrainian military withdrew its forces from Russia’s Kursk Oblast in March 2025. The decision came after several major developments, ranging from the deployment of the North Korean military to support Russian operations in Kursk to the temporary suspension of intelligence sharing by the United States. This long-read examines the operation in the context of the wider Russo-Ukrainian war and asks the question: “was the juice worth the squeeze”?

What is Neoreaction?

“Neoreaction” is a right-wing ideology born in Silicon Valley that has spread through much of the tech ecosystem. This piece examines the ideological foundations of Neoreactionary thought and how this framework explains the MAGA-Tech alliance that has formed under the second Trump administration.

Why It Matters

What is Neoreaction?

You’re not alone in thinking that something strange has happened to the Republican Party…

Read more

a year ago · 387 likes · 13 comments · Alexander Vindman

The MAGA Schism

There’s a civil war brewing in the world of MAGA. The Trump-Musk axis that led to the creation of DOGE has quietly come apart, while formerly prominent Republican figures like Vivek Ramaswamy now grapple with the GOP’s nativist politics. This piece examines the divide in the wide coalition that once defined the 2024 Trump campaign and how this factionalism may impact the second Trump administration.

Why It Matters

The MAGA Schism

The launch of Operation Midnight Hammer is the most significant foreign policy decision made by the second Trump administration to date. However, judging from recent reporting from within Republicans circles, the decision to launch Midnight Hammer has also represented one of the largest political schisms within the Trump administration. Six months into his second presidency, the broad political coalition that previously carried Trump to victory appears to be cracking. With midterm elections right around the corner, a combination of infighting on the right and growing public dissatisfaction with the Trump administration may spell disaster for the GOP…

Read more

10 months ago · 391 likes · 10 comments · Alexander Vindman

Dear readers,

Earlier today I had the pleasure of appearing on NPR Morning Edition and discussing the current state of the War in Ukraine. Given recent developments on the battlefield and major changes in American foreign policy, this timely interview will definitely be of interest to anyone following recent developments in Eastern Europe. Give it a listen through the embedded player above or through this link here.

This post provides an in-depth breakdown of key parts of the National Security Strategy and why it represents not only a major departure from previous trends in American foreign policy but also a threat to American interests.

Dear readers,

On Friday evening I shared my initial take on the 2025 National Security Strategy (NSS) published by the White House. Public commentary and responses from European leaders, State Department officials, and administration-adjacent figures have only solidified my initial read on the document. This analysis further reviews Trump’s roadmap for American national security and foreign policy. The bottom line up front: This “strategy” eases pressure on U.S. adversaries, seeks to coerce allies, and binds U.S. influence to the Western Hemisphere while ceding influence in Europe to Russia and influence in Asia to China. This will upend decades of U.S. strategy across both Republican and Democrat administrations which will result in the exact opposite of the strategic stability the NSS professes to pursue. If the concepts and visions for American foreign policy included in the 2025 National Security Strategy are actualized, future generations will look back on this moment as the closing chapter of 80 years of cooperation with post-war Europe and the start of America’s retreat from the world’s stage.

The reality of the Trump administration is that the NSS may be implemented partially or not at all as the current administration has frequently acted on Trump’s whims and personal interests. Nevertheless, the NSS should be evaluated based on the merit of the former strategies that drove U.S. policies and the ability of the departments and agencies to implement the President’s signed strategy.

“Flexible Realism” and “Primacy of Nations”

There are two guiding concepts listed in the first half of the National Security Strategy that are crucial to understanding the Trump administration’s approach towards foreign policy. The first, “Flexible Realism”, calls for the United States to be “...realistic about what is possible and desirable to seek in its dealings with other nations.” This concept is further expanded on, with the strategy stating “We recognize and affirm that there is nothing inconsistent or hypocritical in acting according to such a realistic assessment or in maintaining good relations with countries whose governing systems and societies differ from ours even as we push like-minded friends to uphold our shared norms, furthering our interests as we do so.”

While a proponent of “Flexible Realism” would argue that this strategy prevents over-extension of American resources and allows the United States to engage with international partners without preconditions, we should consider what this policy approach says about the driving force behind American foreign policy in the Trump era. Previously, the United States functioned as the de facto guarantor of security for liberal democracies across the globe. Our free markets, free elections, and the freedoms entrusted to every American citizen represented the ideal form of government and were worth fighting for when challenged at home or abroad. Our allies and our alliances were predicated on mutual respect towards these concepts. Given the spread of democracies across the world through the third wave of democratization, these concepts also created greater alignment between our citizens and the citizens of our friends, which has since increased the likelihood of relationships that endured across changes in governments.

When Washington worked with illiberal governments or authoritarian regimes (be it Putin’s Russia during the Obama-era “Reset” or dictatorships like Uzbekistan during the Global War on Terror) our bilateral engagement carried the expectation that our partner would liberalize and partially align with American concepts of governance. A well-known example of this is that alignment with American laws regarding child labor is a requirement for signing free trade agreements with the United States. While adhering to these principles sets a limit on engagement with some countries, American leadership correctly viewed these concepts as an integral part of our interests in the world. This also helped expand soft-power and cement American norms as being the international standard for telecommunications, finance, and other elements of the modern economy. Those norms, not tariffs and punitive trade restrictions, were the key points of the multilateral trade agreements like Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) that President Trump has discarded so easily - even as the National Security Strategy says we should seek to continue to lead in those areas. Additionally, the reference to the “primacy of nations” as a guiding concept in the National Security Strategy suggests that the Trump administration will not pursue cooperation with multilateral institutions, alliances, and transnational nongovernmental organizations. This will undoubtedly further limit the United States’ influence in decision-making processes relevant to international trade and security and generate a power vacuum that will be filled by China, Russia, and Iran.

Under the 2025 National Security Strategy there is no guiding concept, no higher ideal, and no shared values that guide American foreign policy. “Flexible Realism” means working with religious theocracies in the Middle East without objection. “Flexible Realism” means appeasing dictators in the name of “stability” and turning a blind eye to the inherent chaos authoritarians invite. “Flexible realism” means that the only driving force behind American foreign policy are the whims of Donald Trump and the commercial interest of his inner circle. We should remember that the institutions, alliances, and concepts that serve as the backbone of our international system and the post-war order once represented a form of idealism. By adhering to this strategy, the Trump administration has put an end to the notion of America as a “city upon a hill” and a beacon of hope for the free world.

The “Trump Corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine

According to the 2025 National Security Strategy, the United States will begin refocusing its strategic interests away from Asia, Europe, and the Middle East, and will instead treat the Western Hemisphere as the primary theater for American foreign policy. This includes a reference to a “Trump Corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine. As mentioned in my initial reflection, this means that the United States will not tolerate the influence of adversarial peers like Russia or China in the Americas, or the presence of multilateral formats opposed to American interests like BRICS. This also means that the United States will take any actions deemed necessary to retain control over the Western Hemisphere - including using military force against unfriendly governments. This ignores a key lesson of history: the long history of United States’ interference and interventions in the region have not only generated significant distrust (which opponents of the US have used to gain influence and maintain power), but have also compounded many of the problems the US now seeks to solve.

The reference to the Trump Corollary in the National Security Strategy suggests that the current buildup and posturing by the military off the coast of Venezuela is not a one-off response to a political crisis, but is instead a model for American policy towards our Latin American neighbors. While the current deployment off the coast of Venezuela is ostensibly a response to the threat of maritime narco-trafficing from Venezuela, the Trump administration may not see a need to provide pretext to future military actions in the Western Hemisphere.

It should be noted that under the Trump Corollary, the United States’ dominion over the Western Hemisphere will not be synonymous with benevolent, warm relations with our neighbors. The American border will remain militarized and border crossings will likely continue to be restricted with Latin American citizens and residents of the United States experiencing profiling from ICE and other domestic authorities. Parallel to this, the prospect of the United States military using kinetic force will remain a possibility for Latin America and the Caribbean. This is a prescription for flashpoints and fires in our own backyard. While the document makes no reference to the annexation of Greenland or Canada, it’s impossible to rule out a renewed interest by the Trump administration if relations with Ottawa and Copenhagen continue to deteriorate.

“Promoting European Greatness”

Perhaps the most alarming portion of the National Security Strategy is the section titled “Promoting European Greatness.” While much of the document can be seen as the basic outline of the realist, transactional foreign policy, “Promoting European Greatness” reads as a manifesto against the post-war European political project and a reflection of the far-right rhetoric that guides the White House under the second Trump administration. The section shifts from standard claims of Europeans not meeting defense spending to anti-democratic coercion to advance Trump-friendly far-right governments, invoking replacement theory, calling it “civilizational erasure” due to patterns of migration. The Trump NSS squarely targets the European Union and liberal governments while avoiding efforts to protect Western societies from Russian and far-right disinformation campaigns and censorship.

The United States wants Europe to spend more on arms and meet defense spending targets set by NATO while also seeking “Strategic Balance” with Russia. It should be noted that the concept of “strategic balance” remains undefined and open for interpretation - does this mean Russia is subdued and cooperative with the Atlantic community, or that Russia is given free reign and its own sphere of influence? The lack of clarity of what exactly this means may be intentional and designed to accommodate future changes in Trump’s rhetoric towards Europe, Ukraine, and Russia. The United States will also support “patriotic parties” across the continent that seek to subvert the European Union while strictly engaging with individual countries across the continent. Perhaps the most drastic objective included in this section is “Ending the perception, and preventing the reality, of NATO as a perpetually expanding alliance”, suggesting that countries like Georgia, Ukraine, and Moldova will be unable to receive NATO membership in the future. The vision for Europe under the second Trump administration is a fractured continent governed by far-right parties seeking “strategic balance” with an aggressive neighbor that once held dominion over everything east of Berlin. To achieve this vision, the United States will work to undo decades of European integration and destroy a project that was once seen as the cornerstone of the post-war liberal international order.

Indefensible Taiwan and “Traditional Systems of Government” in the Middle East

The 2025 National Security Strategy has major implications for the United States’ role in Asia and the Middle East. In both theatres, the US will be pulling back from its current scope of engagement and will be leaning more on allies and neutral governments to maintain stability. In Asia, this means expecting that Japan, Korea, and Australia spend more on defense in order to maintain strategic parity with China. Although there is no change in America’s Taiwan policy, there is the possibility that without an increase in allied spending that Taiwan becomes “indefensible.” China is no longer described as an adversary or threat to democratic interests abroad but is instead framed as a competitor in trade that may be dissuaded from future conflict. Coupled with the aforementioned long-term outlook on Taiwanese sovereignty, it would appear that the United States no longer views the Asia-Pacific as a region that may be secured from aggression through American and allied deterrence. We are no longer relying on shared values to build connections with our democratic allies in East Asia and turning increasingly coercive on trade in ways that mimic China’s strong arming of the same populations. We must ask ourselves what impact this will have on our ability to coordinate collective defense policies in the region.

Simultaneously enacting policies that will generate resentment among our allies while asking those same partners to dedicate greater resources to defending American interests will create long-term fractures in these relationships. Through this approach we risk alienating allies whose support is integral to meeting the strategic challenge of China.

The Trump administration’s policy vision for the Middle East includes a curious detail regarding democratization in the region. According to the National Security Strategy, the United States will no longer “hector” potential partners in the region about our objections to their “traditional” style of governance. We can infer that this means the United States will no longer reference reform or democratization when engaging with Gulf monarchies or authoritarian regimes throughout the region. I believe this is a short-sighted miscalculation by the Trump administration. This month marks the one-year anniversary of the end of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria: a reminder that even an entrenched autocracy can collapse under its own weight and dysfunction after enough time. Had this policy been the guiding principle for American foreign policy in the Middle East a year ago, Assad’s government would have been labeled one of several “traditional governments” in the region that were impervious to change and potentially worthy of American support and assistance. The inclusion of this clause does nothing to advance American interests in the region or accommodate real power dynamics in the Middle East - it was likely added to facilitate further deals between members of Trump’s inner circle and Gulf monarchies. The Arab Spring showed us how quickly the dynamics in a country and region can change in the face of popular outrage. Our failure to anticipate such a change in Iran in 1979 led to decades of problems for the United States. We should not overestimate the stability of dictators today if we expect to have good relations in the region for the long-term.

Aftermath

By Saturday morning, European leaders and State Department Officials alike had shared public comments on the National Security Strategy online. The prevailing sentiment among European observers was that this document represented not only the closing chapter of decades’ worth of cooperation between the United States and Europe, but also that Washington may soon actively sabotage the political and economic systems of the European Union through the promotion of “patriotic parties” and far-right figures. Amidst an ongoing impasse over a potential peace agreement in Ukraine, representatives of the Russian government claims that the document is “consistent with our vision.”

Parallel to this discourse, far-right influencers and tech figures like Elon Musk have called to abolish the EU after “X” was fined by the European Commission for violations of transparency standards. While not directly related to the National Security Strategy, the timing of this development added a new degree of fervor to online discourse on potentially dismantling the EU by members of the far-right.

There are few elements of this National Security Strategy that can be seen as objectively beneficial to the United States and to the average American. This strategy is equal parts misguided and incoherent and seeks to maintain American influence in key regions of the world while decreasing our footprint and strategic focus. Coupled with the decimation of USAID, the shuttering of Voice of America, and recent reporting on the potential withdrawal of American forces from European NATO members by 2027, it would appear that the Trump administration has already done lasting damage to American soft power abroad.

The sweeping reversal of U.S. national security strategy has triggered a backlash from Democrats and Republicans alike. Congress, alert to the threats of Trump policy, has looked to legislate restraint. The recent National Defense Authorization Act unveiled near simultaneously with the 2025 NSS secures funding for Ukraine security aid, establishes guardrails that limit the ability of the White House to suspend military intelligence sharing between Kyiv and Washington, and formally authorizes funding for the Baltic Security Initiative. While these provisions are potential counterweights to elements of the 2025 NSS, we must reckon with the reality that there is a pronounced incongruence between the foreign policy vision of the White House and the interests of Congress and the American people.

The question now isn’t “how do we course correct” or “how do we walk-back these policies.” In four years, the next administration will have to piece together a new strategy in a more dangerous world where our presence has diminished and our alliances have been damaged.

Planning for what comes next begins now.

Former Marine Colonel Doug Krugman was a contributor to this post.

Dear readers,

The White House has officially released the second Trump administration’s National Security Strategy. While I will soon be posting a longer examination of this document and its implications for American foreign policy in the coming years, I wanted to provide you all my initial read on the strategy given its major implications for the United States and the world as a whole.

Bottom line up front: the United States will be focusing on the Western Hemisphere for the foreseeable future while drawing-down our strategic presence in Europe and Asia. In place of promotion of democracy and defending the international order, the United States will now adhere to a policy of “flexible realism” and establish a “Trump Corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine in Latin America. While this would mean aggressively limiting the presence of rival powers like China and groupings like BRICS from Latin America, this strategy would also imply that the United States would be quick to use military force in response to political developments in the region.

The National Security Strategy does not include language that would describe China as an adversary or a threat. Instead, the Trump administration describes China as a competitor in trade that must be grappled with economically to prevent a potential conflict. There is no change to the United States’ Taiwan policy. However, there is a statement that without further defense spending from Pacific allies like South Korea, Japan, and Australia, the United States will be unable to maintain a military balance with China, which would “make defending the island impossible”.

With regards to Europe, Washington’s goal is to simultaneously support “patriotic” parties in Europe that seek to undermine the EU, demand that European allies spend more on defense, and re-establish “Strategic Balance” with Russia on the continent. These three policy objectives are provided under the banner of “Promoting European Greatness” - despite the fact that they are not only contradictory but also undermine the security and political ties that have defined the European-American relationship for 60 years. The strategy also references NATO expansion, claiming that Washington will prioritize “Ending the perception, and preventing the reality, of NATO as a perpetually expanding alliance.” When coupled with recent reporting from Reuters that calls for Europe to take over leadership of the alliance in 2027, we can see that this all points towards America’s potential exit from the continent in the near future.

The 2025 National Security Strategy describes a withdrawal of American interests in the Middle East due to the unpopular nature of “forever wars” and the development of domestic energy production. Despite the continuation of hostilities by Hamas, the earlier exchange of prisoners between the Israeli military and Hamas is cited as the foundation for a future peace in the region. Curiously, the document outlines the need to pursue pragmatic relations with Gulf monarchies and to abandon any notion of democratization (referring to previous administrations’ “misguided experiment with hectoring these nations” on the topic of democracy).

This weekend I will provide a longer breakdown of the strategy. However, I think the vision outlined by the current administration represents a real crossing of the Rubicon in that the United States has signaled its intent to withdraw from the key regional alliances and abandon any notion of promoting democracy abroad or defending the liberal international order. We’re abandoning our allies and folding to our adversaries - the damage left by this strategy will take generations to mend.