Comprehensive National Security Strategy Desperately Needed

A look at the history books shows how to contain the nation’s most significant adversary.

Every sitting administration provides the American people with a National Security Strategy (NSS). The Pentagon issues a complementary National Defense Strategy (NDS). These documents are published to inform US citizens as well as allies, friends, and adversaries how the administration intends to keep the nation and its interests secure with an all-of-government strategic plan. What the White House offers is often inadequate, just a list of threats to be addressed, raising the questions: What are you going to do about these? How will those threats be prioritized?

Eisenhower Insisted on a Grand Strategy

Not since the Dwight D. Eisenhower administration has a national security team undertaken the challenge of developing an effective “grand strategy,” if you will. In October 2022, the Biden administration published the latest National Security Strategy, covering a range of concerns and potential threats, along with non-threats as well, such as climate anxiety and diversity, equity, and inclusion. However, it didn’t present a strategy. During President Donald Trump’s first term, the national security team identified specific threats that the United States must address.

Comparing Trump 45’s 2017 NSS to his predecessor’s, that of Barack Obama, “Trump’s new national security strategy places an emphasis on stopping Islamist terrorism and calls it out by name. Obama’s 2015 national security strategy referred to Islam just twice: once because it’s part of ISIS’ name and once to say the administration rejected ‘the lie that America and its allies are at war with Islam,’” the Daily Caller observed. Though then-President Trump produced an NSS that identified his priority as defeating Islamic jihadists, it did not outline a unified, integrated strategy to counter all the myriad threats the United States faced.

So, what does a grand strategy look like? The best example is the one created to win World War II. It was simple, easily explained, and actionable. It might be described as “Europe First.” All tactics and operations flowed from that one concept: that the Allies would focus on winning in Europe and then the Pacific. The fight against the Japanese in the Indo-Pacific would not be abandoned, but the competition for resources and effort would favor defeating Germany while still moving deliberately against the Japanese. The Europe First strategy meant that the United States and Great Britain would invade North Africa, then Sicily, and ultimately France at Normandy.

It was not surprising, having been a key leader during World War II, that President Eisenhower, in 1953, wanted to have the same strategic thinking applied to the Soviet Union. “In the months after Dwight Eisenhower was inaugurated president, he initiated what became known as Project Solarium,” Real Clear Defense reported. Documents produced by the project were classified and remained so until 1985.

The pivotal book, Waging Peace: How Eisenhower Shaped an Enduring Cold War Strategy, described how the 34th president of the United States crafted his plan of action for dealing with America’s most dangerous nuclear adversary. Authors Robert R. Bowie and Richard H. Immerman explained:

“Eisenhower and [Secretary of State John Foster] Dulles were convinced that an effective foreign policy required an explicit and integrated grand strategy. This was not to be a blueprint for the future that would provide mechanical answers for specific issues and problems as they arose. Such issues would be decided in the Oval Office in consultation with key advisors. But a strategic concept should establish longer-term purposes and priorities that would ensure consistency in day-to-day decisions and coherence for the actions of the United States and its allies over time.”

The Solarium Project’s results were crucial in laying the foundation for the “integrated grand strategy” that Bowie and Immerman discussed. When the Solarium staff briefed the results of their work to President Eisenhower, “At the conclusion of the question period, the president made a statement to all those in attendance: He never attended a better or more persuasively presented staff job,” according to the July 16, 1953, Memorandum by the Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (Robert Cutler).

Project Solarium Established an Analytic Process

The significance of Project Solarium lay in its structured and disciplined analytic process, which lasted approximately 35 days and was conducted at the National War College, utilizing the latest shared intelligence and reference documentation. The results were the synthesis of a competitive debate by advocates of differing points of view. The strategy document that became National Security Council 162/2 integrated parts of deterrence, constrained military spending, and the concept of containment – all Cold War concerns. It was a benchmark in strategic planning.

A similar process would be of value today. The Trump administration needs a comprehensive strategy and a corresponding worldview. It could be as simple as “China First.” If the US national security team could formulate a detailed game plan to defeat the People’s Republic of China economically, geopolitically, and militarily – a Project Solarium for today —  that would put in deadly crosshairs the nation’s most significant adversary.

The views expressed are those of the author and not of any other affiliate.