Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • Israel-Hamas
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
  • Research
    • Briefs
    • Explainers
    • Reports
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / Grand strategy / The case for getting rid of the National Security Strategy
Grand strategy

November 4, 2023

The case for getting rid of the National Security Strategy

By Benjamin Friedman

The Biden administration recently released its first National Security Strategy. As is the custom in Washington, the document was greeted with fanfare by bureaucrats eager to promote their work, beat reporters with deadlines to meet, and think tank pundits, who skim to find mention of their pet issues. But the National Security Strategy is a predictable sham. There is no real strategy to be found there because strategy documents do not prioritize among goals to guide resource allocation.

While national security strategy is unavoidable, “national security strategy” documents should end. The same goes for Quadrennial Defense Reviews and National Defense Strategies. They are a distraction from debate about real strategy—the unofficial but operative kind manifest in the defense budget. Those concerned about the need for strategy should focus on making the budget process more strategic, not on documents that are at best a vacuous public relations exercise.

Read at War on the Rocks

Author

Photo of Benjamin Friedman

Benjamin
Friedman

Policy Director

Defense Priorities

The Latest

op-edUkraine‑Russia, Europe and Eurasia, NATO, Russia, Ukraine

No cause for alarm: The case for a measured response to Russian air incursions

By Jennifer Kavanagh

October 20, 2025

Press ReleaseVenezuela, Americas

Pushing regime change in Venezuela is a terrible idea

By Jennifer Kavanagh

October 17, 2025

op-edNATO, Europe and Eurasia

Trump has a new European target in his crosshairs

By Daniel DePetris

October 17, 2025

In the mediaIsrael‑Iran, Middle East

Did decisive U.S. action restore deterrence—or has Washington simply been lucky?

Featuring Rosemary Kelanic

October 16, 2025

op-edUkraine‑Russia, Europe and Eurasia, NATO, Russia, Ukraine

President Donald Trump’s Ukraine pivot is an opportunity for Europe to step up

By Christopher McCallion

October 16, 2025

op-edGrand strategy

Is Trump’s national security strategy really that important?

By Daniel DePetris

October 16, 2025

Events on Grand strategy

See All Events
virtualGreat power competition, Balance of power, China, Grand strategy, Middle East

U.S.-China competition and the value of Middle East influence

June 10, 2025
virtualChina, Alliances, Balance of power, Diplomacy, Grand strategy, Russia

China-Russia: Cooperation or a no-limits alliance?

April 3, 2025
virtualSyria, Balance of power, Basing and force posture, Counterterrorism, Middle East, Military analysis

Syria after Assad: Prospects for U.S. withdrawal

February 21, 2025

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2025 Defense Priorities All Right Reserved