Washington, Jan 30 (NationPress) The new US National Defense Strategy under the Trump Administration signifies one of the most noteworthy changes in US defense priorities since World War II, according to experts. They describe a shift towards missions focused on the homeland and the Western Hemisphere, coupled with increased expectations for allies.

“As articulated, this National Defense Strategy illustrates a significant departure from the transatlantic defense relationship and, indeed, from US defense priorities and postures that we've observed since the Second World War,” remarked Carrie A. Lee, a senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund during a think-tank event.

She characterized it as “a monumental transition from a globally oriented United States that positions itself as a leader to one that is much more focused on low-intensity and asymmetric conflicts in the Western Hemisphere.”

Lee also highlighted “the merging of policing operations and military actions in the Western Hemisphere,” noting that the document “emphasizes shared responsibilities with allies.”

Kristine Berzina, a defense and security analyst, observed that the strategy emerges from “a phase of unforeseen developments in the transatlantic defense relationship,” referencing “activities in Greenland,” maneuvers “in Venezuela, Latin America,” and “discussions regarding Iran,” alongside a previously released national security strategy.

Sophie Arts, a specialist in security and defense with a focus on the Arctic, explained that the strategy regards the Western Hemisphere as “essentially a US sphere of influence,” referring to neighboring countries as “its backyard,” a region where Washington aims to maintain “freedom from foreign influence, particularly from China.”

She mentioned the document emphasizes the protection of “maritime and air routes, particularly in the Arctic,” and guarantees “complete maritime and military access to vital sea lanes and critical territories.” Greenland is notably included, with the strategy mentioning it “in the same context as the Panama Canal and what is termed the Gulf of America.”

Arts indicated that the strategy prioritizes “homeland defense over forward posture,” shifting focus to “developing deterrence capabilities from the homeland rather than through deterrence.” She noted that the administration intends to pursue this through its ambitious missile defense architecture, known as the Golden Dome.

She acknowledged that Canada and Greenland already assist with “missile warning and overall situational awareness,” but noted that missile defense would represent “a significant change.” Presently, neither Canada nor Greenland is involved in missile defense, but Washington aspires for their participation in the Golden Dome initiative.

Arts emphasized that Greenland has firmly stated, with support from Denmark and its NATO allies, that it does not wish to align with the United States and has rejected pressure and threats from the Trump Administration. She added that there are “no indications of immediate threats from Russia or China towards Greenland.”

On Capitol Hill, Kate Stotesbery, a government relations director closely collaborating with lawmakers, indicated that Congress approaches defense policy from “a distinctly different perspective” compared to the strategy. While lawmakers aim to support the administration, they also “task the administration with maintaining American leadership in a multipolar world.”

She noted some overlap exists. “Their to-do lists do converge significantly,” she said, but added, “the core vision and intent chart different paths.”

Lee expressed uncertainty about whether the Pentagon can or will execute the strategy “as it is articulated.” She pointed out that it “demands substantial modifications to US defense posture, training, and equipping,” following years emphasizing “large-scale combat operations” in Europe and the Pacific.

She also raised concerns about the gap between strategic language and budgeting, stating that the document “is not a $1.5 trillion strategy… The National Defense Strategy is more akin to a $500 billion strategy as written.” She cautioned, “Show me your budget, and I'll reveal your strategy.”

Regarding domestic deployments, Lee drew “a clear distinction between the Department of Homeland Security” and the military, but mentioned that the administration has been “explicit about their intention to utilize the military” for roles including “managing domestic protests” and “aiding immigration operations.” She deemed this “highly significant.”

She cited a cost estimate, stating that recent domestic deployments “amounted to approximately $500 million,” arguing that such operations divert “time, training, and resources” from other missions.