The Doctrine of Disruption: The US NSS and the Strategic Reorientation of American Power in Asia, between the “Nixon in Reverse” Maneuver and EU Marginalization - Analysis

The National Security Strategy (NSS) published today, December 5, 2025, by the Trump Administration transcends the role of a simple policy document. It is a veritable manifesto of geopolitical rupture, sanctioning the definitive abandonment of the post-Cold War hegemonic paradigm and recognizing a world inevitably oriented toward multipolarity. Under the banner of "Principled Realism" and the guiding principle of "America First," the NSS is not a strategy of isolationism, but an aggressive realignment that focuses national resources on great power competition, with the uncompromising protection of security, economic prosperity, and technological superiority as its sole vital objectives.

President Donald Trump attends a press conference with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer (not pictured) at Chequers at the conclusion of a state visit on September 18, 2025 in Aylesbury, England. This is the final day of President Trump’s second UK state visit, with the previous one taking place in 2019 during his first presidential term. (Photo by Leon Neal/Getty Images)

A Single Interpretive Lens

The NSS elevates economic competition to a fundamental component of national security, an approach that Extrema Ratio has long identified as central to the power dynamics of the 21st century. The primary objective is Reindustrialization and Re-Shoring, a strategic imperative aimed at ensuring that the United States does not depend on any adversary, present or potential, for products, critical components, and essential materials.

The text opens with rhetoric about "recovery from catastrophe," aimed at legitimizing the immediate reversal of course from the previous administration, celebrating the end of four years of "weakness and failure." The emphasis is on the swift actions already taken, from restoring sovereignty over borders to deploying a trillion dollars to strengthen the Armed Forces, to unleashing American energy production and imposing historic tariffs for the re-shoring of critical industries. This combination of military muscle and economic protectionism establishes geo-economic warfare as the central element of the new national security strategy, complemented by unconventional diplomacy that has led to peace negotiations in eight conflicts in eight months.

The Decisive Confrontation: China and the Indo-Pacific

China is unequivocally identified as the long-term existential strategic competitor, the only power capable of reshaping the international order to serve its own interests. The doctrine rejects the past illusion that opening markets would induce Beijing to play by the rules.

The strategy is based on the goal of winning the economic and technological future in the Indo-Pacific, defined as the epicenter of global growth. Measures include ending predatory state subsidies, industrial espionage, intellectual property theft, and direct threats to critical supply chains (such as those related to rare minerals).

On the military front, the NSS focuses on integrated deterrence. While maintaining its stated policy of not supporting unilateral changes to the status quo in Taiwan, the strategy urges First Island Chain allies to massively increase their asymmetric defense capabilities, granting greater US access to ports and military facilities to deny maritime and air access to a potential aggressor.

The Eurasia Maneuver: The "Reverse Nixon" Calculation

The NSS reveals a marked pragmatism toward Russia, justified by the need to confront China. The crucial interest of the United States is to negotiate a rapid cessation of hostilities in Ukraine in order to stabilize European economies and mitigate the risk of conflict.

This objective is the foundation of the geopolitical calculation that led to the summit between Trump and Putin in Alaska (August 2025). The meeting, preceded by the significant presence of a joint Sino-Russian fleet in the waters off Alaska (a "hidden fortress" supporting Putin's negotiating position), is the prelude to the "Nixon in reverse" strategy:

• Exploit Russia's post-war weakness and its growing dependence on China (Russia is a geopolitical pawn in this scenario).

• Attempt to draw Moscow into a post-pacification agreement in Ukraine (the success of which is clearly doubtful and dependent on complex variables).

• In line with Flexible Realism, the NSS opens up the possibility of "good relations and peaceful trade relations" with Moscow, provided that this serves the ultimate goal: neutralizing the anti-Western axis and focusing resources on containing China.

Europe: The Cost of Subordination and the Hague Commitment

Europe emerges as the target of the document's most explicit and strategic criticism, portrayed as a continent in decline and, through its own fault, subordinate. The NSS accuses Europe of:

• Economic decline caused by excessive regulation.

• "Civilizational cancellation" resulting from migration crises and loss of identity.

• Adherence to Net Zero policies considered harmful, which have weakened its industries to the benefit of its competitors.

The US strategy focuses on burden-sharing. The NSS sets a new global standard with the Hague Commitment, which requires NATO countries to spend five percent of their GDP on defense. This requirement is a clear sign of strategic disengagement from the US security burden in Europe.

Strategic Intelligence Assessments: Asymmetry and Dislocation

The NSS analysis, in light of the geo-economic dynamics already outlined by our analysts, allows us to decipher the vectors of strength and tension in the new multipolar order.

1. The Colby Doctrine and the Dislocation of Military Power

The elevation of key figures in the security apparatus, notably Elbridge Colby, who was appointed Under Secretary of Defense for Policy last December, is the foundation of the NSS's military posture. His doctrine is clear: the main and decisive threat to America and to the control of "global commons" lies in the Indo-Pacific.

As we already pointed out in our analysis on March 4, the reality is that two percent of GDP is simply inadequate for Europe's current defense needs. The demand for five percent defense spending through the Hague Commitment is not only a financial sanction against Europe, but a strategic requirement for implementing the Strategy of Denial in the Indo-Pacific. This maneuver has the explicit aim of forcing Europe to become militarily self-sufficient on the second front (Russia/Europe), freeing up US military resources to focus on the first front (China/Taiwan). This is a calculated redeployment of global power projection, forcing European allies into a veritable strategic rethinking.

2. The Sino-Russian Axis: Structural Fractures

Trump's "reverse Nixon" gamble has a basis in political realism that rests on the inherent fragility of the alliance. The pact between Russia and China, described by Extrema Ratio as a temporary alliance of convenience, is structurally undermined by growing economic and technological asymmetry (China's GDP is significantly higher than Russia's).

The real point of friction, the "throne of mistrust," is China's geo-economic expansion into Central Asia, Russia's traditional sphere of influence. Beijing is exploiting the "distraction dividend" of the war in Ukraine, as noted by our analysts, to consolidate its influence through energy and infrastructure corridors that erode Moscow's historic influence. The NSS aims to cynically exploit this Russian dependence, as history suggests that the coexistence of two dictators with strong hegemonic ambitions, such as Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin, makes an equal relationship irreconcilable in the long term, fueling a latent and deep conflict of interest.

3. Commercial Intelligence and the Implications Companies

The NSS formalizes the integration of the Intelligence Community (IC) in supporting economic strategy, with an explicit mandate to monitor global supply chains and technological vulnerabilities. This elevation of Commercial Intelligence has direct implications for European decision-makers and companies.

The NSS is a clear warning: de-risking from supply chains controlled or influenced by China is no longer an option, but a strategic imperative. The Trump administration will use the geo-financial power of the dollar and new strategic tariffs to influence the decisions of developing countries and discourage collaboration with Beijing and Moscow. For European multinationals, the choice imposed by the NSS is between aligning with the US economic bloc, ensuring transparency and security in their supply chains in critical sectors (AI, semiconductors, energy), or exposure to increasing financial and regulatory burdens.

In conclusion, the 2025 NSS is not a strategy of retreat, but of aggressive and calculated reorientation, using economics and intelligence as primary weapons. Europe, relegated to a secondary theater and invited to recover its "civilizational self-esteem," faces the imperative of independently financing its own security and reorganizing its supply chains, at the risk of becoming, in the long term, a mere pawn in the confrontation between the hegemonic powers.