President Trump recently released# his new national security strategy.

It's a remarkable document, one# that upends many of the principles that have guided US policymaking since# the end of World War II.

Tonight, I'll discuss the new strategy and# how it may play out in conflict zones around the world, with Tom# Friedman of The New York Times.

Tom, happy New Year.

Thank you# for being with us.

2026, big year, big year, maybe even bigger than# 2025.

There's a lot to talk about.

Let's talk about this national# security strategy, which was just released last month in December.# Many people were struck by it.

You were struck.

I was struck by the# fact that it barely discusses our traditional adversaries, China and# Russia, and this has been really flummoxing to a lot of people.

Why# does it barely touch on the subject of Russia and China and their role# in American foreign policy and talk about what it does talk about.# Well, Jeff, I think that document really um manifests what a radically# different view this administration holds about the world, radical not# just from Democrats but from previous Republican administrations.

You# and I grew up in a world of both Republican and Democratic leaders# who saw the role of the president to be the defender and expander of# a world of free markets and free people and the rule of law, and in# such a world, Europe, particularly the European Union, was an important# pillar and ally.

This group is different.

They see themselves# in a global kind of civilizational war defending the Judeo-Christian# world, um, uh, uh, and a world of independent nations not working# together in any collaborative way with America being the biggest# and therefore having the biggest influence.

That's very different# from the world that you and I grew up in, um, and that has really# been the mission of America, um, up to now, right?

Let me read you# something that you wrote, um, just a few days ago.

Uh, he is not he# Trump is not interested in refighting the Cold War to defend and expand# the frontiers of democracy.

He is, in my view, interested in# fighting the civilizational war over what is the American home# and what is the European home with an emphasis on race and Christian# Judeo faith, and who is an ally in that war, and who is not.

Talk# about this concept of defense of home.

Well, you know, if you ask me,# Jeff, what's the biggest question you get traveling around the world# today.

Um, it's a question that, um, uh, Itamar Ben Gvier, the far# right nationalist leader in Israel, um, had on his on his bus ads during# the Israeli last election, and it was just a question that said,# who's the landlord here?

Whose country is this anyway?

Because we# live in this age of massive migration, heritage Americans, yes, exactly# in our country that would be it.

We live in this age of massive# migration happened very, very fast.

Um, and basically a lot of Americans# went to the grocery store sometime in the last 20 years, and the woman# at the cash register wasn't wearing a baseball hat.

Then they went# into the men's room and there was a woman there.

Then they went to# the office and their boss rolled up a robot and it seemed to be# studying their job.

People's sense of home, of cultural norms, and# of work all got disrupted at the same time.

So people's sense of# home, you know, people's sense of rootedness.

Um, my friend Andyarzner# has the best definition of home and community.

It's a place where# people feel connected, protected, and respected.

And right now there# are a lot of people in America and around the world, basically# asking whose country is this anime and when can I feel at home?

So what# is the Trump within the framework of this national security strategy.# What is the particular Trump criticism of our traditional allies# in Europe, that they're not protecting their own values, which are our# values.

Well, he sees them basically as having unrestrained immigration,# and particularly in Europe's case it's from the Muslim world,# not from the Hispanic world as we have in the United States, very# different from the Judeo-Christian tradition and being open to a lot# of these radical transgender from Trump's point of view, norms LGBT,# and that explains why Trump sees Putin as an ally.

He's a white# Christian nationalist who hates the LGBT movement and all of the# progressive causes.

They see him not in some struggle of east west, but# as an ally in the civilizational war.

Let me just ask you, I mean,# the, the, the, the, this hostility to Europe, France, Germany, Britain# in particular, 3 pillars of our alliance system.

It is true that# Europe has an immigration assimilation problem, and it is true that it# has a radical Islamist problem.

Well, here's what it just watch# this for a second, because here's what JD Vance had to say.

It made# it very, very clear at the Munich Security Conference.

Let's watch# this.

The threat that I worry the most about vis a vis Europe is not# Russia.

It's not China.

It's not any other external actor.

And what# I worry about is the threat from within.

The retreat of Europe from# some of its most fundamental values, values shared with the United# States of America.

Look, to give him some credit, to give some credit# to the intellectual framework of this.

Europeans do have European# nations have a different understanding of free speech, not, not First# Amendment based, like we, we have.

Um, they do have this.

They are# more secularized than our society is, although we're moving.

into an# unchurched in an unchurched direction.

Are they, are they onto something# at all, or is it just xenophobia masquerading as an intellectual# exercise.

I think they're onto something in this sense, Jeff, you know, um,# and I felt this in America too, on the question of immigration,# I'm for a really high wall, with a very big gate, OK, which is# that countries have got to control their borders, and we know from# history when countries get flooded by immigrants, uh, the other, um,# in a very rapid way, in a very short period of time.

It upsets# people's sense of home, and Europe, like America, to some degree,# lost control of their borders.

Did Joe Biden not take that seriously?# Not enough.

Not enough.

Under pressure from the left wing of# the party, not enough.

And again, I'm super pro-immigration, but# it's got to be done in a way where the people come, can become Americans.# Um, and, and be really anchored in our society and our values, and# I think, so he's not raising an illegitimate point.

What I have a# problem with them on Europe.

You know, Americans will do anything,# Jeff, for the European Union, except read about it.

Um, but to my, to# my mind, the European Union is one of the greatest inventions of# modern man.

Can we please remember the history of Europe, like from# time immemorial was of a wars, family wars, religious wars, sectarian# wars.

The last Italy was dirty.

That's the last 3 of which the# United States, World War I, World War II, and the Cold War, we had# to send our brothers and sisters over to help quell.

Out of that# history, they've created the biggest center of free markets, free# people, and the rule of law.

Yes, I think they would tell you, um, and# Brexit was proof of it.

Some of the immigration got out of control.# But let's remember they are a wingman in the world.

We are the# blessed generation that lives in a world of two United States, not# just one, a United States of Europe and the United States of America.

So his critique is not illegitimate.

It's# not without point, but when it's presented just this way, as if you guys# are off on some crazy civilizational jag, and we have no interest in# you anymore, not appreciating how stable another United States makes# our world.

That's nuts, you know, Trump sees the European Union,# frankly, as like a shopping mall that isn't paying enough rent, you know,# the French baguette shop is not paying enough rent.

Rather than# seeing this whole entity as another giant center of free markets and I# have to say though that even President Obama agreed he voiced it in a# more civilized, moderated fashion, but that Europe wasn't paying its# fair share of its defense, yes, to be, to be fair.

we kind of# walked into a couple of situations here.

On the other hand, for me,# the EU corollary, what's a great strategic alliance, NATO, has# kept the peace since World War II, and it seems as if, well, it doesn't# seem as if we've already seen President Trump threatened# militarily to NATO allies, Canada, and Denmark.

So, so talk about,# talk about the defense framework here and what that means for our# understanding of whether we're on Ukraine's side or not.

Well, you# know, let's, let's sort of really zoom out for a second.

If we go# back to 2022, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and we go to the# Hamas-Israel war.

What basically was going on was Ukraine was trying# to join the West, and Israel was trying to join the east.

That is# Ukraine was trying to join the European Union.

If Ukraine with its, I think# 60 million some people, really advanced economy, high tech.

If# Ukraine joins the European Union, we are actually 95% to a Europe whole# and free.

It would be the greatest expansion of freedom and free# markets in Europe since the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Had Israel been# able to normalize with Saudi Arabia.

It would have been the greatest# expansion of the world of inclusion in the Middle East since Camp# David, Russia stopped the first and Iran stopped the 2nd.

All right?# And, and that's why that war is really important.

And what Russia# did is bad and what Hamas did is bad.

It doesn't mean everything# Israel did on the other way is good.

I'm not, we can go into all of that# or Ukraine, but something really big is at stake here.

You know, we# take for granted, Jeff, the world that you and I were born in.

I# was born in '53.

You were born in when?

Uh, 2004 I knew Yeah, right.

We have grown up in the most peaceful,# prosperous era of world history, like in a really, really long# time, you know, this is the thing, the success of NATO creates an# assumption that the world is always like this for no particular exactly.# The world is the way the world is because America was the way# America was.

You take that America out of the world.

You take an# America that no longer believes in the European Union, no longer# believes in NATO, no longer believes in being the defender of free# markets and free people, and I tell you, our kids will grow up in a# very different world and you will miss this one when it's gone.

So# here's a 2026 question.

Are we on an inexorable slide toward the# dissolution of NATO.

The reason I ask this is because the German# chancellor himself just said recently, our partnership with the United# States of America, which has long been the reliable guarantor of our# security is changing.

For us Europeans, this means that we must defend# and assert our interests even more strongly on our own.

The Europeans,# as you know, because you talked to the leaders, they are no longer# looking to Washington as a source of stable protection.

Are we# heading in one direction, or is this something that 34 years from now# we'll be sitting around this table saying, what was that about?

That# was strange.

Remember when we, when we, we wanted to date some# other people for a few months.

I, if Trump keeps going where he's# going, he's going to threaten this.

I do believe the the weight and# the value and importance of these alliances will even, you know,# push him back, but if we have Trump and then Vance, given his isolationist# tendencies, we will live in a less prosperous and a less stable# and a much more China dominated world.

Let's go to that.

Why is China# not a major player in the national security strategy of the United# States anymore.

Well, again, it should be, um but as Trump as Trump sees# it, right, and I, the people who write these documents, I, I, I,# I don't know where, where, where they're coming from.

But China today# is a pure military and economic rival of the United States, but# different from Russia at least.

China is in the game, that is China has# a fundamental economic interest in maintaining the global trading# system.

Um Russia, all they do is export oil like, did you, have# you bought a Russian watch lately or a Russian computer or a Russian# AI system, you know, that's all they've got, and that's why Putin# is such a disrupter.

Basically, you went from a distributor of wealth# early on in his term to a distributor of dignity, OK, and distributors# of dignity are people who start wars, you know, over nationalists,# you know, causes or whatever.

So managing the USChina relationship,# I think is the central foreign policy.

It's interesting you're# in a way making an argument that the Trump national security team# makes, which is that Russia and Ukraine, that's a sideshow compared# to the big issue.

You have Elbridge Colby and other people in the# Pentagon who are China, China, China, China, and they're saying we're not# going to get bogged down in Ukraine on behalf of Ukraine in the same# way that we shouldn't have gotten bogged down in the Middle East# China is going to eat our lunch.

I mean, it does sound like you're in,# in, in uh, in, in alignment with a with a Trump vision.

Am I allowed# to swear on this show?

It's PBS.

OK, so sorry, because I would say# that is something stupid, OK, OK.

Why is it?

We are a country of# 340 million.

China is a country of 1.3 billion people, and whatever# you think about China, Jeff, you can love him or hate him.

These are# serious people.

When 1.3 billion serious people are focused on economic# growth and military development.

The idea that we alone can take# them on is utter nonsense.

Oh, so you're saying we will, we need to# be with Europe, so Europe is with us.

That's that's the only way# we can deal with them on trade.

How would you deal, how would any# sane person deal with China on trade.

We'd get all our allies# together.

We might even strike a treaty, call it TPP, OK, or the trans-European, you know, American trade.

We all agree on a# set of values and rules, and then we'd sit down with China with# real weight as equals.

How would a moron do it?

He'd actually go to# war with all our allies at the same time and then threatened China and# then discover, oh, you have rare earths that we need that run our# entire economy.

Oh my God, nobody told me.

I didn't.

I missed that# tweet.

So the the Chinese love this.

Why does China and Russia always# vote Trump because they know he can never put together an alliance# that can truly contradict.

No, it is, it is interesting that# most of the neighbors, most of the countries that touch China, North# Korea being the exception, probably the sole exception, would rather# be allied with the United States of course than with China.

So# then this goes to the key question why is there contempt in the Trump# administration for the notion of alliances among democracies.# Well, it starts with the fact that the president thinks if you have# a trade surplus with me, you are stealing from me, OK?

And, um, since# that is nothing to do with economic s It's like a superstition.

It's# like believing you, you shouldn't have a black cat, you know, across# your path, all right.

When you start there, then you can't look# at someone as a potential ally, and um what the president believes# on tariffs is simply wrong.

There is no economist in the Milky Way# galaxy who believes what his spokesman said, spokeswoman said that tariffs# are a tax cut, OK?

There's no one who believes his view on balance# of trade.

It's all crazy, all right, and that's why if you look# at all the stories in the last month because I've been doing a# column on this, um, the number of small business people who are just# up in arms.

They're completely can't plan.

They can't import,# whatever.

And so if everything is a transaction, if you know the# price of everything and the value of nothing, which is Donald Trump.# OK, then you don't appreciate how these countries can be allies with# Jeff, Did countries take advantages after World War II, you know, when# we stood astride the world.

Yeah, there's no question, but we're the# world's biggest economy, and we had a growing economy because we# were the biggest.

We benefited from all the world's economy at 45,# could we have done more sharing the pie inside, trade insurance for# people who got disrupted by trade.

Absolutely we should have, but the# idea that you overturn this whole system for what?

Right.

The interesting# thing one of the interesting things about this Trump strategy# document.

are the words Trump strategy.

right, because this is not a# person we have this experience with consistent thoughts and application# of thoughts, and it's very interesting that your paper just ran a terrific# piece by Adam Entous on the buildup or the last year of the Trump# management of the Ukraine file, and he wrote this, I think it's a very# smart observation.

Mr.

Trump had scant ideological commitment.

His# pronouncement and determinations were often shaped by the last person# he spoke to by how much respect he felt the Ukrainian and Russian# leaders had shown him and by what caught his eye on Fox News.

So# this is an interesting, there's an interesting dissonance here.

On# the one hand, Donald Trump is not somebody with fixed ideology,# right?

Um, on the other hand, he's issuing or his administration is# issuing a national strategy document that has that's very fixed in in# its view.

So do you think that the strategy document you just wrote# a column about it actually doesn't matter that much because what matters is what Trump thinks on any given# Tuesday.

I'm gonna confess something on your show, Jeff.

I have no sources# in this administration because having sources in this administration# other than the president would be dangerous because whatever they tell you, if# you then write a c.. story about it, Trump can go# absolute 180 degrees the opposite the next day on Twitter or on Truocial.# So it's all him.

There's no process.

There's no deputies committee.# Look how they've changed tariffs.

One day farmers, one day not up,# down.

It's all seat of the pants with everyone running around the# boy you saying it's not 4G chess, right?

It's no, actually it's Russian# roulette with a loaded pistol.

OK, that every chamber is exactly# right.

That's what it is, OK?

And so there's no consistency at all,# you know, and not to be devil's advocate about everything, but# isn't that the lack of consistency, doesn't that keep countries like# Iran and North Korea off balance at least.

We don't know what he's# going to do, and, you know, you can't think of many Democrats who# scare.

authoritarian adversaries like, like Iran or North# Korea.

Doesn't this at least Absolutely.

And if you harness that,# if you focus it as the president did in bringing about the ceasefire# in Gaza, for which I gave him effusive praise, because I think# only he could have done it because he was the only one who was ready# to bring real leverage on Israel and real leverage on Hamas.

When# he's focused like that, he can do it, but compare that to Ukraine.

He# brings super leverage on Ukraine, but nothing on Putin.

And one of# the great mysteries here I've never bought into the Russia, you know,# owns Trump, that Putin owns Trump.

I've never bought into any of those# things.

But when you don't buy into any of those things, Jeff,# you're just left with one of two things.

One is he's a complete# dupe for Putin.

and the other, you know, which is worse, is that he# actually likes Putin more and his values than he does Ukraine and# Zelensky.

Do you think he has core values?

I think he's a purely# transactional person on most issues, but not on this one.

It's very# strange.

He keeps, he was ready to bring leverage on Netanyahu.

OK,# and on Hamas, but he's never been ready to bring leverage on Putin.# Would somebody please explain why?

Right