This week`s special: extended version of the U.S. National Security Strategy

Defense One's publication of information about an extended version of the Trump administration's security strategy reveals significantly deeper plans for restructuring international relations than the official document version suggested. The slogan "Make Europe Great Again," combined with calls to end "permanent NATO expansion" and the gradual abandonment of European allies' American military support, signals a fundamental reassessment of transatlantic ties. The concept of Europe's "civilizational erasure" through migration and restrictions on free speech presents ideological justification for reorienting American policy from traditional partners to right-populist movements and governments. IESS suggests that intentions to concentrate cooperation on Austria, Hungary, Italy, and Poland as an attempt to create a crack in European unity by supporting forces skeptical of Brussels bureaucracy. Particularly alarming is the mention of "gradual distancing of these countries from the EU" – this is no longer criticism of European policy but open encouragement of union disintegration.

The proposal to create a Core 5 format of the U.S., China, Russia, India, and Japan represents a radical break from postwar architecture, where democratic values were the criterion for membership in leading international clubs. This concept effectively legitimizes authoritarian regimes as equal partners in global governance, transforming the international system from value-oriented to purely pragmatic. For Ukraine, this means potential transformation into an object of bargaining between great powers, where its fate will be decided not based on the will of the Ukrainian people, but as a result of compromises between Washington, Moscow, and Beijing. Recognition of the "failure of American hegemony" and focusing only on countries that "directly threaten American security" effectively removes European countries, including Ukraine, from the perimeter of vital American interests. The refusal of the role of "Europe's chief defender" in favor of fighting drug cartels in Venezuela illustrates radical reprioritization, where a region confronting the greatest geopolitical threat from Russia is viewed as secondary.

The White House's official denial regarding the existence of an alternative document version doesn't refute the disclosed information but rather confirms its sensitivity. If Defense One were publishing fantasies or disinformation, the administration could simply ignore the material or refute specific elements. Instead, categorical denial of any "alternative, private, or classified version" looks like an attempt to control the narrative after an unwanted leak. Accusations of leaks from "people far from the president" are classic tactics of distancing from unpleasant revelations without refuting their substance. We note the situation as exposure of the Trump administration's genuine strategic vision, which is significantly more radical than public statements. For European security, this means preparing for a scenario where the U.S. not only reduces its engagement but actively supports forces undermining European unity while attempting to build a new global governance system together with authoritarian regimes.

Slovakia

Key news to follow:

1.Fico blocks the reparation loan for Ukraine
2. Fico calls Ukraine a “black hole”

Analysis: The declaration of the Slovak PM refusing to support a reparation loan using frozen Russian assets once again exposes the authentic nature of Bratislava's so-called “peace policy”, which is simply a deliberate sabotage of instruments pressuring Moscow. The Slovak premier's argumentation demonstrates classic fusion of Kremlin narratives and pragmatic populism, as he references supposed "U.S. peace efforts" potentially undermined by asset confiscation. Particularly cynical appears the reference to Slovakia's "difficult financial situation" as a country that found hundreds of millions of euros to gift Babiš's Agrofert through the Istrochem cleanup scheme, suddenly discovers itself too impoverished to help Ukraine defend against Russian aggression. References to humanitarian aid and refugee acceptance are designed to create an illusion of solidarity, but this is needed to cover the refusal of real commitments.

However, when Fico called Ukraine a "black hole through which billions of euros disappear," he fully dropped the mask of diplomatic courtesy and demonstrated overtly pro-Russian positioning. The assertion about "absolute impossibility" of Ukraine's EU accession by 2027, while simultaneously praising Serbia and Albania's readiness, exposes Bratislava's true priorities – not the criteria of EU integration, but geopolitical orientation. The Slovak premier effectively claims that a country defending European borders from Russian aggression and bearing the greatest sacrifices in the war against authoritarianism deserves EU membership less than countries that have spent decades balancing between West and East. This is a deliberate distortion of reality serving Kremlin narratives. Fico's indignation regarding "EU pressure" to provide military aid demonstrates his inverted understanding of the problem: Bratislava views European solidarity not as an obligation but as an infringement of sovereignty.

Synchronized actions by the President, Foreign Minister, and PM form a coherent strategy undermining the EU's consolidated position. Fico understands that after Orbán's potential electoral defeat in April 2026, Bratislava will remain without protection from European sanctions, thus desperately seeking allies through corruption schemes like Istrochem. Meanwhile, Brussels still limits itself to soft rhetoric instead of real action – using the rule of law mechanism, blocking European funds, or even initiating Article 7 procedures could force Bratislava to reconsider its course. So the critical question arises: will the Union continue powerlessly observing how its own members undermine collective security?