After the United States released a new national security policy, it caused a storm in the Western world. The main reason is that this policy has turned long-term allies in Europe into adversaries, completely negating the current political situation in Europe and expressing the intention to encourage far-right nationalist parties in Europe to seize power.

(The Trump administration has never been satisfied with NATO and the EU)

Before European countries could come up with words of protest, the defense website "Defense One" released an even more explosive news, stating that there was an undisclosed version of Trump's national security policy, which contained even more radical measures than the public version.

In this politically charged environment of Western media, does this so-called undisclosed version really exist? Defense One is affiliated with a company of the same name and has some influence in the U.S. political circles. It often organizes online and offline events and is generally considered a relatively formal and serious think tank.

This undisclosed version should indeed exist. It might be a discussion draft during the formulation process, and there are differences between this version and the official one, but the overall principles remain the same. For example, both reports negate American hegemony, considering it unsustainable.

(Current European leaders are denied by Trump)

As for Europe, the positions of both versions are consistent, believing that Europe is facing "civilization extinction" due to its immigration policies and "freedom of speech review." Such evaluations are hard for Europeans to accept, as they have long seen themselves as the birthplace of modern civilization, and even the U.S. governance ideas originated from Europe. Trump's national security strategy discusses European integration as a negative factor, which is like stepping on the Western alliance formed since the Cold War.

The United States is a country that fully believes in strength. It respects those it cannot provoke. The comprehensive national strength, industrial competitiveness, and military capabilities of European countries have seriously declined, not only unable to serve American political will, but also becoming a burden.

Especially when Trump needs European countries to stand up and fight a trade war with China, these former economic powers can do nothing. Militarily, it's even worse, as the entire Europe cannot gather a decent fleet to carry out interference in East Asia. Europe has several times more population, GDP, and industrial capacity than Russia, yet it keeps asking the U.S. for protection, how can it become a global power?

(Trump is not very interested in G7)

Trump looks down on Europe, but the undisclosed version proposed an interesting slogan: "Make Europe Great Again." It seems he doesn't look down on Europe, but rather the current leaders in Europe. The undisclosed text points out that it should support various far-right nationalist parties in Europe to seize power, such as Germany's AfD. It also wants to establish closer relations with some European countries that Trump values, letting them dismantle the EU. For example, Austria, Hungary, Italy, and Poland, which are characterized by nationalist parties in power.

This line of thinking aligns with the U.S. military withdrawal from Europe and European defense autonomy. To say that Trump intends to abandon Europe is impossible, but he just wants a group of people who share his views to control Europe, pushing the Democrats' representatives out of power. After these people take office, they will naturally expand their military preparations according to Trump's requirements, allowing the U.S. to safely hand over European defense to them.

In the undisclosed version, there is also the concept of "core five countries," meaning the U.S., China, Russia, India, and Japan form a core circle to decide major affairs in the world. Analysts say that although Trump emphasizes that no country should be greater than the U.S., in reality, he has already defined spheres of influence. Europe falls under Russian jurisdiction, while East Asia is balanced between China and Japan. With a large population and considerable economic development potential, India can take on low-end industries and can be brought into the deliberation body. However, Britain and France, former world powers, lack real value and even fail to get a seat.

(Polish Army in exercise, this country is viewed as a positive image by Trump)

This idea is interesting, but it is unacceptable to China. The concept of the "core five countries" undermines the UN mechanism, equaling the destruction of the post-war international order. Bringing Japan and India into such a mechanism is equivalent to tacitly accepting their demands to become permanent members, each replacing the position of Britain and France. Japan's inclusion is unjust, and India's inclusion would make this deliberation mechanism completely ineffective.

The undisclosed version also points out that the most urgent goal of the U.S. national security policy is to facilitate a ceasefire in the Middle East and the establishment of diplomatic relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel. This is a naked service to Israeli national interests. In the absence of a resolution of the Palestinian issue and the implementation of the two-state solution, talking about the establishment of diplomatic relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel would erase the boundary between justice and injustice, and is similarly unacceptable.

Perhaps because of this, the term "core five countries" was deleted from the officially released version. The Trump administration even denies the existence of other versions. A White House spokesperson told the media that there are no other, private or classified versions, and that any so-called "versions" are leaked by people far from the president who don't know what they're talking about. It seems that Trump's team clearly knows that political fantasies cannot be played for anyone to hear.

Original: toutiao.com/article/7582780531004260907/

Statement: This article represents the personal views of the author.