Military Review

“Russia is a threat, China is a competitor”: the main theses of the US National Security Strategy

24
“Russia is a threat, China is a competitor”: the main theses of the US National Security Strategy

October 12 at the White House website was published The US National Security Strategy (NSS), in which Russia is designated as "an immediate threat to the international order." It is the basic document issued by every American administration that outlines the foreign policy of the United States. Of course, it should be taken into account that there is a public policy, and there is a non-public one, however, after reading this document, one can understand the vector of Washington's policy.


An analysis of this document leads to disappointing conclusions about Washington's plans for Russia. What are these plans and how will the US implement them? We will try to answer this question in this article.

Russia and China in the US National Security Strategy


“The most pressing strategic challenge facing us comes from powers that combine authoritarian rule with a revisionist foreign policy. It is their behavior that challenges international peace and stability... Many undemocratic countries are joining the world's democracies in refusing such behavior. Unfortunately, Russia and the People's Republic of China (PRC) do not. Russia and China face different tasks. Russia poses a direct threat to a free and open international system, recklessly flouting today the basic laws of the international order, as its war against Ukraine has shown. The PRC, by contrast, is the only competitor with the intention of reshaping the international order, using increasingly economic, diplomatic, military and technological power to achieve this goal.”

- says the text of the document.

The United States thus defines the circle of its most dangerous adversaries - these are Russia and China. However, if China is called a “dangerous competitor”, which has a wide range of opportunities to influence international politics, then Russia, in the imagination of the Americans, is a rather mediocre power that poses a threat, but does not have the same capabilities as China. Actually, in the future, this is directly indicated in the document.

“Russia poses an immediate and ongoing threat to the regional security order in Europe and is a source of disruption and instability around the world, but it lacks a wide range of PRC capabilities… Russia’s strategic limits have been exposed since the outbreak of the war against Ukraine.”

The National Security Strategy goes on to describe the strategy that the United States intends to use with respect to China.

“Our strategy towards China consists of three points:
1) invest in the foundations of our strength at home—our competitiveness, our innovation, our stability, and our democracy;
2) to coordinate our efforts with our allies and partners, acting with a common goal and in the name of a common cause, and
3) Compete dynamically with China to protect our interests and build our vision for the future.”

That is, Washington means that in order to defeat China, it is necessary first of all to surpass the PRC in the technological, economic, political, military, intelligence and global spheres. It must be admitted that so far the Americans are quite successful in this. Especially when it comes to the political sphere. The recent crisis around Taiwan, which actually ended in favor of the White House, is a clear confirmation of this.

To learn more about how successful the US strategy towards China has been in the past decade, see the article. "The American Strategy for China's Downfall: How to Break the World's Second Economy in One Decade", which was published in the "Military Review" last year. We will move on to the consideration of the American strategy towards Russia.

The United States intends to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia in Ukraine


Speaking of Russian foreign policy, The National Security Strategy notes that

“The Russian government has chosen an imperialist foreign policy to subvert key elements of the international order. This culminated in a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in an attempt to overthrow its government and bring it under Russian control.”

This is followed by wording that the United States allegedly tried to establish contacts with Russia in order to determine areas of cooperation, but Russian President Vladimir Putin rejected all these attempts.

“The United States, under successive administrations, has made significant efforts to reach out to Russia to limit our rivalry and identify pragmatic areas of cooperation. President Putin rejected these efforts, and it is now clear that his behavior will not change. Russia now poses a direct and ongoing threat to international peace and stability. This is not about a struggle between the West and Russia. We are talking about the fundamental principles of the UN Charter, to which Russia is a party, in particular, the inadmissibility of acquiring territory through war,”

- noted in the US National Security Strategy.

From this part of the text it clearly follows that Washington does not intend to continue to conduct a dialogue with Vladimir Putin. That is, the United States is betting on a change of power in Russia. This is confirmed by other theses in other parts of the document, where the internal policy of the Russian president is also criticized.

For example, the US National Security Strategy states that

“Russia has a stagnant political system that does not respond to the needs of its people,”

and also that

"The Russian government under President Putin violates the human rights of its citizens, suppresses opposition and shuts down independent media."

The following are the theses that even more clearly indicate this:

“Despite the fact that the Russian government made a strategic miscalculation, it is the Russian people who will determine the future of Russia as a major power capable of once again playing a constructive role in international affairs. The United States will welcome such a future and, in the meantime, will continue to oppose the aggressive actions being taken by the Russian government.”

In this context, the decision of the President of Ukraine Zelensky to refuse negotiations with Vladimir Putin no longer looks strange and reckless - it probably came from Zelensky's American advisers, since it fully fits into the American strategy.

As for the development of the military conflict in Ukraine, the document explicitly states that the goal of the United States is to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia in Ukraine.

“We are leading a united, principled and decisive response to the Russian invasion, and we have united the whole world in support of the Ukrainian people. Working with a broad and strong international coalition, we have provided a near-record level of security assistance to provide Ukraine with the means to defend itself. Together with our allies and partners, America is helping to turn Russia's war against Ukraine into a strategic defeat. Across Europe, NATO and the European Union are united in confronting Russia and defending common values. We are holding back strategic sectors of the Russian economy, including defense and aerospace, and we will continue to counter Russian attempts to weaken and destabilize sovereign states.”

The thesis about inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia in Ukraine is not new; it was voiced back in early March by US Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, who emphasized that, from the US point of view, the ultimate goal of the military conflict in Ukraine is “the strategic defeat of President Vladimir Putin.” Recently, the same thesis was repeated by Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs Celeste Wallander, who expressed confidence in the possibility of inflicting such a defeat on Russia in Ukraine.

The US National Security Strategy notes that while aspects of strategic approaches will depend on the course and outcome of the military conflict in Ukraine, a number of elements are already clear.

The Americans will, firstly, comprehensively support Ukraine, as well as promote its regional integration with the European Union, secondly, they will strengthen the coalition with allies against Russia, and thirdly, they will respond to Russia's actions, which, according to the White House, threaten key US interests.

“We will take into account that Russia’s conventional military forces are weakened, which is likely to increase Moscow’s dependence on nuclear weapons in its military planning. The United States will not allow Russia or any other power to achieve its goals through the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons.”

- indicated in the document.

In Washington, based on the text of The National Security Strategy, they believe that they have succeeded in isolating Russia, since the military conflict in Ukraine contributed to

"Russia's declining status vis-à-vis China and other Asian powers such as India and Japan, and Moscow's soft power and diplomatic influence has weakened."

Shaping the future world order


Another of the goals of the US National Security Strategy is to deprive Russia of the status of an "energy superpower". These goals are supposed to be achieved as a consequence of the imposition of sanctions and export controls, reducing Europe's dependence on Russian energy resources, and the transition from fossil fuels to environmentally friendly energy sources.

“We have teamed up with allies and partners in Europe and around the world to impose sanctions and export controls that will weaken Russia's ability to fight wars in the future. We are partnering with the European Commission to implement an ambitious plan to reduce Europe's dependence on Russian fossil fuels, strengthen European energy security and achieve common climate goals,”

- says the text of the document.

The US presidential administration does not hide the fact that the goal of the White House is to create a new world order in which they will continue to dominate.

“The world is at a turning point right now. This decade will be decisive in defining the terms of our competition with the PRC, overcoming the acute threat posed by Russia, and in our efforts to address common challenges, in particular climate change, pandemics and economic shocks. If we do not act urgently and creatively, our window of opportunity for shaping the future international order and addressing common challenges will close.”

At the same time, Russia has no place in this future world order as a strong power with its own interests. The National Security Strategy states that the United States will "work" with countries bordering Russia, supporting anti-Russian movements along the entire perimeter of its borders.

“By supporting Ukraine, we will also work to strengthen the stability and resilience of other democracies. We will support the European aspirations of Georgia and Moldova and their commitment to important institutional reforms. We will assist partners in strengthening democratic institutions, the rule of law and economic development in the Western Balkans. We will support diplomatic efforts to resolve the conflict in the South Caucasus.”

As a conclusion (main conclusions)


Based on the content of the US National Security Strategy, in which China and Russia are named as the main rivals / opponents of Washington, as well as with the outlined plans for Moscow, the following conclusions can be drawn.

First, the United States considers Russia an "aggressor" and Vladimir Putin as a person with whom it is no longer possible to conduct a dialogue. Therefore, the White House will support the enemies of Russia in Europe and along the entire perimeter of the borders, as well as undermine the situation from the inside, waiting for a change of power in the country.

Secondly, the military conflict in Ukraine has demonstrated the weakness of Russia, its strategic limitations, so the Americans no longer consider it an equal partner.

Third, the US will continue to build a coalition against Russia and seek its complete isolation. According to Washington, the failures in the military conflict in Ukraine have already lowered the status of the Russian Federation in the eyes of India, China and Japan.

It is worth noting that The National Security Strategy document reflects the position of the US Democratic Party and a significant part of the American establishment. However, the position of the United States in relation to Russia is not monolithic - part of the Republican Party adheres to other approaches in relation to Russia. Donald Trump and Elon Musk are the mouthpieces of this part of the elite who are in favor of a constructive dialogue with Moscow. However, apparently, at the moment they do not have any significant levers of influence on the situation.

In any case, Washington's plans are a direct threat to Russia, and at the moment it is not very clear how exactly Moscow is going to fend off these threats. So far, Russia has not developed a clear doctrine that would indicate what strategy it will follow and how it sees the image of the future. And the existing challenges require this very much.
Author:
24 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Mouse
    Mouse 26 October 2022 16: 04
    +5
    .you can understand the vector of Washington's policy.

    The vector does not change ..... from time immemorial ...
    1. ViktorBiryukov
      26 October 2022 16: 09
      0
      Well, why, the same Trump pursued a policy different from the current American administration, and he had completely different priorities.
      1. Mouse
        Mouse 26 October 2022 16: 12
        +2
        A temporary phenomenon ... and I won’t say that he even breathed in our direction ...
        1. Civil
          Civil 27 October 2022 07: 12
          0
          it is the Russian people who will determine the future of Russia as a major power

          1. The first miscalculation of the Americans: laughing Who is at the helm at the current moment, he will determine the present. Our population is not the government. Doesn't want to and won't.
          the Russian government under President Putin violates the human rights of its citizens, suppresses opposition and shuts down independent media

          2. The second miscalculation: the population is aggressive FOR the suppression of the "opposition", and indeed any other opinion other than the official one, does not find any serious support. Society is consolidated in support of any government initiative. Up to the introduction of serfdom and the right of the first night. It's not essential.
          The White House will support Russia's enemies in Europe and along the entire perimeter of the borders

          3. The miscalculation of the Americans. We have long found out that most of the countries around us are the unfinished Nazis. We are in the Ring of Enemies.

          A completely idiotic document gave birth to a hegemon based on complete ignorance of the foundations of the Russian State. Therefore, this strategy is doomed to failure.
    2. Romanovski
      Romanovski 31 October 2022 10: 29
      +1
      ""...Russia is a threat to the world order, China is a competitor..."".
      ------
      Okay, seriously??? What world order???? World order with gays and buggers at the head of Western states??? The world order, which Hitler did not have time and could not build (again, Russia / the USSR was prevented at the most inopportune moment ...), and the United States picked up the baton of the new slave-owning world order ??? What kind of world order do the US have in mind??? WITH IMPUNITY destruction of peaceful Japanese cities by two atomic bombs in 1945??? WITH IMPUNATED bombing and destruction of blooming Yugoslavia (Serbia) in 1999.??? With an unjust war and a shameful US defeat in Vietnam??? With the shameful flight of the United States from Afghanistan after 20 years of bloody internecine slaughter a year ago ??? And who destroyed the blooming Libya and drowned in the blood of the civil war??? Is it Russia or China with Iran??? Or maybe NATO led by the United States??? Who destroyed and drowned in the blood of Syria and Iraq??? Russia and China??? Is it???Who sponsors the war and Nazism in Ukraine??? Again Russia and China with Iran and North Korea??? Who blew up two threads of the Nord Stream at the bottom of the Baltic and dipped the German economy into a container of stinking excrement??? Again Russia and China??? Or maybe the toxic, vindictive and arrogant government of the United Kingdom, which, as always, spoils Russia everywhere and always ???
  2. Vic Vic
    Vic Vic 26 October 2022 16: 30
    0
    I wonder if the concept of this strategy will change when China returns Taiwan to its home harbor.
  3. Andrey Moskvin
    Andrey Moskvin 26 October 2022 16: 34
    0
    Now, if Ukraine were smashed to rubble, we would be considered an "equal partner."
    1. dauria
      dauria 26 October 2022 17: 38
      +5
      Now, if Ukraine were smashed to rubble, we would be considered an "equal partner."

      No. When there was the economy of the USSR and the CMEA against the American, Germany, France and England with Japan, then there were "equal partners", as China is now for the USA. Any army rests on the economy. And it is not and is not expected. And at least brandish a nuclear club, at least not - everyone understands Russia's place in the world. something between India and a joint EU. We don't even reach third place. And the people with gulkin's nose are left, there is no one to ride on.
      1. Andrey Moskvin
        Andrey Moskvin 26 October 2022 18: 12
        0
        From the article - after the vague SVO, we are no longer considered an equal partner. From there my thought.
  4. parusnik
    parusnik 26 October 2022 17: 05
    +1
    Our roads parted, with the PRC, at one time, and yet, they met by chance .. when will our roads part again? Although, we do not choose the roads, the roads choose us.
  5. Butchcassidy
    Butchcassidy 26 October 2022 17: 11
    0
    Well, that's just Washington's wishlist. I'm not saying that such a factor as political will is missing from the calculation, which Russia has enough, but China does not.

    When Putin leaves power, and sooner or later it will happen, it is unlikely that Putin will remain after 2030, the next President will be no less prepared and no less motivated to defend the legitimate interests of our Fatherland.

    As for China, yes, it has enough economic power, but now the armed forces and the will to use them are coming to the fore.
    1. Aleprok
      Aleprok 27 October 2022 11: 32
      +1
      let's not think about the receiver ... while no one is visible on the horizon. And the history of our country shows that after a strong leader, all sorts of Khrushchevs and Gorbachevs always came ... God forbid that this vicious practice cease forever
    2. fakir88
      fakir88 27 October 2022 11: 52
      -1
      As for China, yes, it has enough economic power, but now the armed forces and the will to use them are coming to the fore.

      The fact that China did not rush headlong to return Taiwan does not mean that it lacks "will", but as for the armed forces, they have technology, production and a huge population - this is clearly better than ours. China is dangerous and incredibly strong, and it is not far from Russia, unlike the United States.
      Well, as a bonus - he is a clear beneficiary from the NWO, China and the United States, and this, from my belfry, is one of the main signs of a strong and flexible foreign policy. And not, "You must first get involved in the battle, and then we'll see" ...
  6. Nikolay Malyugin
    Nikolay Malyugin 26 October 2022 17: 13
    0
    When a vassal leaves the subordination of the sovereign, his anger is understandable. Sometimes it borders on the verge of a clinic. For some reason, many write that our policy is incomprehensible. Everything has been clear for a long time. Since December last year. But in order not to slide into a world war, we will have to work together. I don't even want to talk about such a deplorable result.
  7. Ryaruav
    Ryaruav 26 October 2022 18: 59
    +1
    if power changes in Russia, then most likely it will only get worse for the West, since it is unlikely to be liberals
    1. WayKheThuo
      WayKheThuo 26 October 2022 21: 16
      0
      Under the Soviets, or more precisely, under Dzhugashvili, cooperation between the West and Russia (RSFSR) reached such heights that our liberals never dreamed of.
      1. t-12
        t-12 26 October 2022 21: 42
        0
        What was "collaboration"? In a trade blockade? In setting Germany against the USSR? In the plans for the atomic bombing of the USSR?
        1. WayKheThuo
          WayKheThuo 26 October 2022 22: 38
          0
          Cooperation was multifaceted: from joint military projects with the Germans, through economic cooperation with the Americans, Germans, French and British during industrialization, then within the framework of lend-lease during the Second World War, and then, after Stalin's death, the mass construction of automobile plants (Tolyatti , Kamaz) and cooperation in the construction of gas pipelines, those same ones.
          The bottom line is simple - if you are strong, it is profitable and useful to cooperate with you, if you are weak, you must be subjugated and exploited.
          For the time being, the USSR was strong, they cooperated with it.
          From the very beginning, modern Russia has been and remains a weak peripheral country with a zero ideology - they will not cooperate with us, only exploitation and "milking" in various forms.

          Everything that you listed was, of course, like the flip side of the coin, but the enemies were appropriate - Germany alone was worth something.
          As they say - what country, such are its enemies.
  8. WayKheThuo
    WayKheThuo 26 October 2022 21: 15
    +1
    Secondly, the military conflict in Ukraine has demonstrated the weakness of Russia, its strategic limitations, so the Americans no longer consider it an equal partner.


    Not in the eyebrow, but in the eye.
  9. Illanatol
    Illanatol 27 October 2022 08: 59
    0
    Quote: Civil
    1. The first miscalculation of the Americans: laughing Whoever is at the helm at the current moment will determine the present. Our population is not the government. Doesn't want to and won't.
    "

    The population in Russia is not power - yes. But the government is forced to take into account the mood of the people and their preferences. If it goes against the grain, it will suffer political bankruptcy.
    Examples? Boris Godunov, Nicholas II, Kerensky, Yeltsin. It seems that they possessed completeness of power ... but how did they finish?
    This was brilliantly noted by Pushkin in "Boris Godunov": "The people were silent." And this silent disapproval of the people was quite enough.
    Only that power in Russia is strong that has a credibility. As soon as the loan is exhausted, neither the army nor the special services will help. And only those who understand it and take it into account in their actions stay in power.
    That is why Putin, a staunch liberal in his views, is forced to appeal more and more often to "remnants of socialism."
  10. Illanatol
    Illanatol 27 October 2022 09: 06
    0
    Secondly, the military conflict in Ukraine has demonstrated the weakness of Russia, its strategic limitations, so the Americans no longer consider it an equal partner.


    Rare nonsense. The Yankees never considered us an equal partner. They never considered anyone an equal partner. They are the "exceptional nation".

    "The military conflict in Afghanistan has demonstrated the weakness of the United States, its strategic limitations. Therefore, the Russian Federation (as well as China, Iran and even Saudi Arabia) should no longer consider the United States an equal partner." laughing tongue
  11. Aleprok
    Aleprok 27 October 2022 11: 28
    0
    Russia exists so that at all times Satanists break off fangs and claws about it ... So it was, is and will always be. Amen!
  12. 16112014nk
    16112014nk 27 October 2022 15: 16
    +1
    The US National Security Strategy states that:
    “Russia has a stagnant political system that does not respond to the needs of its people”

    Well, in general, we can agree with this statement.
    The needs of the people? As one Russian politician said - "They did not fit into the market" ©
  13. rocket757
    rocket757 28 October 2022 15: 19
    -1
    “Russia is a threat, China is a competitor”: the main theses of the US National Security Strategy
    . To say that this is something new ... THIS IS UNLIKELY.
    Then the question is... what is the question then?