Key Differences Between Between President Donald J Trumps 2017 and 2025 U.S. National Security Strategies Plan

 

President Donald J. Trump's name is mentioned in the new 2025 U.S. National Security Strategy plan 27 times, compared to the 2017 plan, where he is only mentioned 2 times.

Key Differences Between Between President Donald J Trumps 2017 and 2025 U.S. National Security Strategies

Both documents outline U.S. National Security priorities under President Trump, emphasizing an "America First" mindset, peace through strength, and countering major adversaries like China and Russia. However, the 2017 version (issued early in Trump's first term) reflects a more interventionist, value-driven approach focused on global engagement and active counterterrorism. The 2025 version (from his second term) shifts toward non-interventionism, economic protectionism, and selective alliances, critiquing past "endless wars" and prioritizing domestic revival amid new global challenges like migration and supply chains.

Overall Structure

• 2017 Strategy: Four pillars: Protect the homeland/American way of life; Promote prosperity; Preserve peace through strength; Advance American influence. Includes detailed regional sections (e.g., Indo-Pacific, Middle East, South/Central Asia)

• 2025 Strategy: Four sections: Introduction (critiquing prior strategies); Desired U.S. goals; Available means (e.g., economy, military); The strategy itself with principles, priorities, and regional approaches (e.g., Western Hemisphere, Asia, Europe).

• Key Difference: 2017 is pillar-based and regionally expansive; 2025 is more goal-oriented and streamlined, with an explicit critique of past policies like over-intervention.

Main Priorities

• 2017 Strategy: Securing borders, defeating jihadist terrorists (e.g., ISIS/al-Qaeda), economic rejuvenation via fair trade and innovation, military modernization, promoting democracy/liberty abroad, and countering transnational crime.

• 2025 Strategy: Ending mass migration, reindustrialization and supply chain security, energy dominance, reviving the defense industrial base, burden-sharing with allies (e.g., 5% GDP defense spending), and using peace deals for realignment.

• Key Difference: 2017 emphasizes active global counterterrorism and value promotion; 2025 focuses on domestic economic security, migration control, and avoiding foreign entanglements.

Threats Identified

• 2017 Strategy: Explicit focus on state actors (China's militarization/economic distortion; Russia's aggression/cyber ops; North Korea's nukes; Iran's terrorism/missiles) and non-state actors (jihadist terrorists like ISIS/al-Qaeda, cartels).

• 2025 Strategy: State actors (China's supply chain dominance/military aggression; Russia's destabilization/Ukraine war) plus emerging issues (narco-terrorists/cartels, Islamist activity in Africa, foreign espionage/propaganda, predatory trade). Less detail on traditional terrorism.

• Key Difference: 2017 highlights ideological/jihadist terrorism as a core threat; 2025 downplays it in favor of economic/migration threats and regional instability (e.g., cartels as "narco-terrorists").

America First Approach

• 2017 Strategy: Sovereignty and reciprocity in trade/alliances; rejects post-Cold War complacency; "principled realism" balancing power with values like rule of law.

• 2025 Strategy: Non-interventionist predisposition; flexible realism; prioritizes U.S. workers/economy over global burdens; critiques "forever wars" and elite-driven policies.

• Key Difference: Both are "America First," but 2017 is more optimistic about U.S. global leadership; 2025 is isolationist-leaning, emphasizing competence and avoiding overreach.

Promotion of Democracy

• 2017 Strategy: Actively champions democracy, human dignity, and reforms abroad; supports transitions to free markets/rule of law; opposes repressive regimes via partnerships.

• 2025 Strategy: Upholds core rights (e.g., free speech) in allies; opposes anti-democratic curbs in Europe; encourages organic reforms without imposition; respects diverse systems.

• Key Difference: 2017 is proactive/export-oriented (e.g., aiding "aspiring partners"); 2025 is defensive/reactive, focusing on protecting U.S.-aligned democracies without global missionary zeal.

Alliances

• 2017 Strategy: Strengthens NATO/EU with burden-sharing (e.g., 2% GDP); deepens ties (e.g., Quad precursors, Gulf partners); views alliances as force multipliers against shared threats.

• 2025 Strategy: Insists on higher burden-sharing (e.g., 5% GDP via "Hague Commitment"); rewards aligned nations; uses economic tools for leverage; focuses on regional self-reliance.

• Key Difference: 2017 builds/expands alliances for collective action; 2025 demands more from allies to reduce U.S. commitments, reflecting frustration with uneven contributions.

Mentions of Afghanistan/Taliban

• 2017 Strategy: Discusses supporting Afghan government/forces against terrorists; aims to prevent safe havens and convince Taliban of military defeat for peace talks.

• 2025 Strategy: No mentions of Afghanistan or the Taliban.

• Key Difference: 2017 actively addresses the ongoing Afghan conflict as a counterterrorism priority; 2025 omits it entirely, signaling a post-withdrawal pivot away from South Asia.

The 2017 plan talked a LOT about fighting terrorists. It named ISIS, al-Qaeda, and the Taliban over and over. It said stopping these groups was a top job for America.The 2025 plan? Zero. Not one single mention of terrorism, jihadists, ISIS, al-Qaeda, or the Taliban. Afghanistan isn’t even on the page. It’s like the writers decided terrorism is over and done with. That’s a big problem.
Just because we left Afghanistan doesn’t mean the bad guys disappeared. The Taliban are stronger than ever, al-Qaeda is still around, ISIS is growing again in places like Africa, and new groups keep popping up. If the official safety plan pretends these dangers don’t exist, America won’t be ready when they strike again, whether it’s another 9/11-style attack, bombings at embassies, or terrorists sneaking across the border. Ignoring terrorism doesn’t make it go away, it just leaves us blind when it comes back. And history shows it always comes back. That’s the huge difference between 2017 and 2025 in plain English.

2017 Plan

2025 Plan

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.-Galileo

Now You Know

How America's New Safety Plan Forgets the Real Villains And Keeps Sending Them Money! (Explained Like You're in 7th Grade)

 

@afg_uprising

So, What's the Big Lesson Here?

Hey kids (and grown-ups who still like simple stories), imagine you're playing a game of tag in the schoolyard. You make a big plan: "Okay, we'll watch out for the sneaky kids who cheat and the bullies who push everyone around." But then, oops! Your plan totally ignores the biggest bully of all,  the one who's still tripping people left and right. And worse? You're accidentally (or not?) handing that bully your lunch money every week. That's kinda like what's happening with America's new "safety plan" for the whole country. It's called the 2025 National Security Strategy, and it's supposed to keep us safe from bad stuff like wars, hackers, and scary groups that hurt people. But guess what? It skips over some super important dangers, and right now, we're still funding the baddest guys around. Let's break it down super easy, like explaining Fortnite rules to your little brother.First, What's This "National Security Plan" Thing?Think of it like a giant homework assignment for the President and the government. Every few years, they write a big report saying, "Here's how we'll keep America strong and safe." The new one for 2025 came out just this month (December 2025, to be exact). It talks a ton about cool stuff like:

• Teaming up with friends like Europe and Asia to beat big rivals (like China or Russia, who act like playground bosses trying to take all the swings).
• Protecting our computers from hackers who steal secrets (kinda like locking your bike so no one swipes it).

Sounds smart, right? But here's the head-scratcher: It barely mentions places like Afghanistan. You know, that far-away country where the U.S. fought a long war for 20 years to stop super bad guys called the Taliban? The Taliban are like the ultimate school bullies,  they took over Afghanistan in 2021, banned girls from school, and do mean things to people who don't follow their strict rules. Our old plans always said, "Watch out for groups like them!" But the 2025 plan? Crickets. Nada. Zip. It leaves out the Taliban and other "bad people" who could still cause big trouble, like hiding terrorists or making the world unsafe. Why? Some grown-ups say it's because the government wants to focus on "new" problems and pretend the old ones are fixed. But is that smart? If you ignore the bully in your class, does he stop picking on kids? Nope!
The Crazy Part: We're Still Paying the Bullies!Okay, plot twist, even though the plan acts like the Taliban aren't a problem, America is still sending them piles of cash. Not checks or apps, actual suitcases full of fresh, green dollar bills flown in on planes. And this isn't old news; it happened today, December 8, 2025! Check out this wild post from a news account on X (that's Twitter, for you non-scrollers). It's from folks in Afghanistan who are fighting back against the Taliban. They snapped a pic and shared the story:

Today, December 8, 2025, in Kabul, the United States provided forty-five million dollars ($45,000,000) in cash—freshly printed—to the Taliban in the early morning. The money was flowis in in via a chartered flight by Moalem Airlines.Yet Afghanistan does not feature in the US national… pic.twitter.com/qXmANW7MYR

— پایگاه خبری قیام ملی -National Uprising News (@afg_uprising) December 8, 2025

Stacks of cash with Taliban members. Whoa, right? That's $45 million bucks enough to buy like a gazillion video games or feed a whole city for months. It flew into Kabul (Afghanistan's capital) on a special plane from an airline called Moalem.
The idea is to help regular Afghan families with food and medicine, since their banks are broken and sanctions (like timeouts for bad behavior) make it hard. But here's the oof: The cash goes straight to the Taliban government. They control everything there, so they decide who gets what. It's like giving your lunch money to the bully and saying, "Use this to buy sandwiches for everyone!" Spoiler: The bully eats it all and laughs.
This isn't a one-time slip-up. Since 2021, the U.S. has flown over $2.9 billion (that's billion with a B!) in cash to Afghanistan. And the new 2025 plan? It doesn't even talk about stopping this or making sure the money doesn't help the bad guys. It's like our safety homework says, "Ignore the bullies," while we keep slipping them allowance. People online are mad, replies to that post call it a "waste of taxpayer dollars" and "betrayal." One even says our leaders have "become a joke." Yikes!So, What's the Big Lesson Here?America's new plan is like a shield that's missing half the arrows coming at us. It focuses on fancy future threats but forgets the real ones staring us in the face, like the Taliban getting stronger with our money. This could make the world scarier: More kids in Afghanistan can't go to school, terrorists might hide there again, and it wastes cash we could use at home for schools or parks.
What can we do? Talk about it! Tell your parents, teachers, or even email your representatives (like

@RepTimBurchett

, who's mentioned in that post). Ask: "Why ignore the bad guys? Why keep funding them?" Knowledge is power, just like in your favorite superhero comic. If we challenge the dumb parts of the plan, maybe next year's version will be bully-proof.
What do you think, fair or foul? Drop a comment below. 

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.-Galileo

Now You Know