Many nations claim to be fighting against forces that they see as a threat to their survival. Conflicts and wars take a different colour when these are stated to be for the survival of a nation. The actions become “no holds barred” as survival is deemed to be the highest morality. The primordial Darwinian instinct kicks in and all questions of right and wrong, moral and immoral, normative judgments and legal restraints go overboard.

Let us take the case of Israel; right from its formation, Israel has been threatened by its neighbouring countries with annihilation. Slogans like “From river to the sea, Palestine will be free” unambiguously imply that Israel shall be obliterated from the world map. During the build up leading to the 1967 war, Israel’s neighbours had openly declared that they shall wipe out Israel; of course, after the war Israel had almost doubled its size and its bigger neighbours, Egypt and Jordan, signed peace Treaties with it. Again, on 13 June 2025, after striking targets in Iran, including its nuclear facilities during Operation ‘Rising Lion’ Netanyahu said on television that Israel did it to eliminate the “Iranian threat to Israel’s very survival.” The US subsequently added its bit for the same goal by using penetrating ammunition that finished the job left incomplete by Israeli strikes. No declaration of war was needed as survival was at stake.

It is not only Israel that is fighting for its survival; Taiwan has faced existential threat from China since 1949. During the First Taiwan Strait Crisis in 1954-55, when China started shelling Islands which were parts of Taiwan, Eisenhower threatened use of nuclear weapons; China did not have any at that time and, perceiving a threat to its survival, it backed out. The threat to Taiwan’s survival persists seven decades later and is creating Chinese spats with its other neighbours.

Pakistan says it is facing threat to its survival from India due to suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty, while India says its existence is threatened by Islamist terror sponsored by Pakistan. India has exercised its right to survival by hitting terrorist camps deep inside Pakistan. Putin had said in December 2021 that NATO’s expansion threatens its survival saying “We have made it clear that Nato’s move to the east is unacceptable. The United States is standing with missiles at our doorstep.” Russia has used this argument of fighting for its survival repeatedly as a justification for its aggression against its neighbours. Of course, Ukraine says that it is fighting for its survival as Putin has repeatedly denied its sovereignty and, at least during the initial invasion, had declared the aim of occupying the whole of Ukraine. Many Southeast Asian countries face challenges to their sovereignty because of Chinese hegemony and civil wars threaten the survival of many African nations.

What is surprising is that, in a document issued on 5 December 2025, Trump says that survival of even the US is under threat. This document, “National Security Strategy 2025” (NSS) of the United States of America, says, “First and foremost, we want the continued survival and safety of the United States as an independent, sovereign republic”. The country has to be protected against threats that include foreign military attack, hostile foreign influence including espionage, predatory trade practices, drug and human trafficking, destructive propaganda and cultural subversion.

The NSS says that even Europe is under existential threat not only because of economic decline but because of another much bigger threat of “civilisational erasure.” Trump wants Europe to remain European, says that the US is sentimentally attached to Europe, Britain and Ireland but Europe faces a civilisational threat of such a magnitude that “within a few decades, at the latest, certain NATO members will become majority non-European.” Trump has thus placed the talk of “great replacement”, which had the status, so far, of a conspiracy theory, in a national security strategy framework.

The NSS document is blunt and represents the culmination of the decline of political correctness in recent years. It has been called “explosive” and that seems to be true for much in it. It not only revives the Monroe doctrine but also adds a “Trump Corollary” to that 200-years old declaration of the then President James Monroe. The Doctrine demanded that Europe keep out of the Western Hemisphere and anybody trying to do otherwise would be considered hostile to the US. The new “corollary” demands of the nations of the two Americas to keep their countries “reasonably stable and well-governed enough to prevent and discourage mass migration to the United States.” These governments should cooperate with the US in actions “against narco-terrorists, cartels, and other transnational criminal organisations.” Trump laments that the Doctrine has been neglected for long but now the US will “reassert and enforce” it so that the US remains the preeminent power in the Western Hemisphere and may use “lethal force” to achieve its goals.

That brings the document to China that has been rapidly expanding its presence in Central and South America. All “non-Hemispheric competitors” will now be denied the ability to position forces or other threatening capabilities, or to own or control strategic vital assets” in what the document calls “our Hemisphere”. It terms the entry of these competitors in the American continents as “incursions” and to prevent that, the US will “assert ourselves confidently where and when we need in the region” pushing out “foreign companies that build infrastructure in the region.” It accuses the successive administrations, both Democratic and Republican, for the “mistaken assumptions that led to US investments in China and “outsourcing our manufacturing to China” accusing them of being “either willing enablers of China’s strategies or in denial.”

Of course, the US shall welcome “European and Asian allies and partners, including India” for joint strength in the Western Hemisphere. For gaining firm allies, monarchies and other non-democratic regimes will no longer be hectored by the US “into abandoning their traditions and historic forms of government.” It calls out the “disastrous ‘climate change’ and ‘Net Zero’ ideologies” for harming Europe and the US and subsidising their rivals.

Reactions have been sharp and swift particularly from Europe, which has been accused in the document of following policies that have undermined sovereignty, suppressed political opposition, caused loss of national identities and self-confidence and even the all-too-visible fall in birthrates. The German Foreign Minister called it “outside” advice” that was not needed. A former French diplomat dubbed it as a “far-right pamphlet.” It has been remarked that the document is like “Putin talking about Europe” and that it has hints of racism.

What is certain is that Trump means and has been practising what is contained in this document. Whether it is deporting illegal migrants, opposing Chinese investments in Panama, threatening invasion of Venezuela, airstrikes on alleged narcotic-smuggling boats, pressuring Europe to increase defence spending or imposing tariffs on imports to make US manufactures competitive, it is all there in the strategy paper. Yet, these actions, that have so far been dubbed as angry outbursts of Trump, now carry the label of US National Security Strategy. China has given a muted response and it has not reacted to NSS condemning NIxon’s opening up of China. A Chinese outburst against Trump’s now formally declared goal of excluding China from the Western Hemisphere is also awaited. Perhaps, the NSS has shocked China and Europe in equal measure, indicating the power of Trump’s apparent madness.

(R N prasher is a former IAS officer. The views expressed are his personal. )