America First—The Monroe Doctrine Returns

Guest Opinion by Tanveer Patel

The White House just released its 2025 National Security Strategy, and if you find government documents impenetrable, you’re not alone. Here’s what this 30-page blueprint for American foreign policy actually says in plain English.

The Core Argument:

For three decades after the Cold War, America tried to be the world’s policeman protecting everyone, everywhere, all the time. This strategy declares that era over. 

The New Approach: 

Protect American interests first and demand allies carry their own weight.

Think of it as splitting the dinner check after decades of paying the entire bill while everyone else ordered lobster.

Five Key Priorities

Border Control: 

Complete sovereignty over immigration and borders. The strategy declares “the era of mass migration is over” and demands neighboring countries actively prevent illegal crossings, not just manage them.

Reindustrialization: 

Bring factories back to America through tariffs and tax incentives. The goal is ending dependence on rivals for critical products—from medicines to military equipment—while creating middle-class jobs.

Energy Dominance: 

Maximize oil, gas, coal, and nuclear production. Climate policies are explicitly rejected as harmful. Energy independence fuels economic growth and reduces reliance on foreign suppliers.

Military Superiority: 

Maintain overwhelming force but use it selectively. The mantra is “peace through strength” to deter conflicts through power, and when fighting is necessary, to win quickly and come home.

Fair Trade: 

No more one-sided deals. Countries wanting access to American markets must reciprocate fairly or face tariffs. The strategy specifically targets China’s subsidized industries and intellectual property theft.

The World in Five Regions

Latin America gets the toughest language. The strategy resurrects the Monroe Doctrine, warning foreign powers to stay out of our hemisphere. This means confronting Chinese infrastructure investments, using military force against drug cartels if needed, and demanding cooperation on border control. 

The message: Our backyard, Our rules.

Asia is the economic battleground. China dominates this section not as a military threat requiring war, but as an economic competitor requiring strategic pushback. The U.S. will use tariffs, export controls, and strengthened alliances with Japan, South Korea, Australia, and India to counter Beijing’s advantages. Taiwan matters because it produces most of the world’s advanced computer chips. The strategy explicitly seeks to prevent war through deterrence while winning the long-term economic competition.

Europe receives blunt criticism and clear demands. Allies must spend 5% of GDP on defense—more than double current levels for most countries. The strategy criticizes European over-regulation, declining birth rates, and loss of cultural confidence. On Ukraine, it prioritizes negotiating a quick end to fighting over indefinite support. 

The message: Europe must take primary responsibility for its own defense, including managing relations with Russia.

The Middle East finally gets downgraded. With American energy independence, decades of obsession with this region are ending. The strategy seeks to maintain partnerships with Gulf states and Israel while avoiding new military entanglements. No more “forever wars” or nation-building experiments.

Africa shifts from charity to commerce. Stop sending aid; start making business deals. American companies should develop Africa’s natural resources for mutual profit, not taxpayer-funded dependency.

The Controversial Elements

The strategy abandons democracy promotion abroad, arguing we shouldn’t impose American governance models on other countries. If a government is stable and willing to trade, we’ll work with them even if they’re not democratic.

International organizations like the UN and WTO are viewed with suspicion as eroding American sovereignty. The preference is bilateral deals where America can leverage its economic power directly.

On allies, the language is unusually harsh. The strategy essentially accuses them of freeloading, enjoying American military protection while underspending on defense and sometimes manipulating U.S. policy to serve their interests rather than ours.

What It Means

For American workers, this promises manufacturing jobs returning from overseas. For those worried about border security, it pledges aggressive enforcement. For those tired of foreign wars, it offers restraint.

But trade-offs exist. Tariffs may raise consumer prices. Demanding more from allies could strain 75 years of relationships. Stepping back from global leadership might create power vacuums that rivals fill.

The Bottom Line

This isn’t traditional American foreign policy. It’s explicitly transactional—we help those who help us. It’s unapologetically nationalistic—American interests come first, always. And, it's candidly power-focused—strength matters more than moral appeals.

Whether you view this as overdue realism or dangerous isolationism likely depends on whether you think America has been too generous or too selfish with the world. Either way, this strategy represents the sharpest break from post-Cold War foreign policy consensus in a generation. Understanding it matters because it will shape America’s role in the world and the world’s relationship with America for years to come.

Disclaimer: The author writes in her personal capacity and does not represent any affiliated organizations.

The 2025 National Security Strategy may be found on the White House website at THIS LINK.

Tanveer Patel serves on the board of the Birmingham Committee on Foreign Relations and is a current member and former state chair of the Society of International Business Fellows. A seasoned international traveler, she has hosted world delegates through these organizations, building bridges across cultures and advancing global understanding.

Opinions do not reflect the views and opinions of ALPolitics.com. ALPolitics.com makes no claims nor assumes any responsibility for the information and opinions expressed above.