The economic well-being has been a key issue in recent elections. After the 2008 financial crisis, many have felt unhappy with their economic situation. Politicians on both sides play to these fears and promise that the average citizen's economic situation will improve by electing them. The flattening and eventual decline of wages as one grows older is a disheartening trend for people that have to work at older ages, which is true for many Americans. Another concerning trend is the decline of wages for people with lower education statuses. One trend that is optimistic is the increasing wages for women in all education brackets. While women still on average make less than their male counterparts, the growth in wages for women could bring the gap closer to equality.

One problem that is often overlooked when promoting and establishing democracies is tribal and ethnic differences. A major example of this is when Saddam Hussein was overthrown in Iraq, the interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi took over. The complication there was that Iyad Allawi was a Shia Muslim in a primarily Sunni Muslim nation. Furthermore the Shia Muslims of Iraq were under Saddam Hussein persecuted and after his capture, were optimistic that they would have more power. In the months following, Sectarian violence between the Sunnis and Shi'ites in Iraq increased. Situations similar to this have happened in African countries, with or without US promotion of democracy. Since Abiy Ahmed won power in Ethiopia in 2018, ethnic tensions have been on the rise. Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed is an Oromo, which despite being the largest ethnic group in Ethiopia are underrepresented. Recently, Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed has had to deal with an ethnic separatist group called the Tigray People's Liberation Front due to ethnic tensions escalating.

It is interesting to read about the fiscal revisions and reshaping going on within the government, particularly, in this document, the Department of Defense. As it mentions in the document, the threats that the DoD intelligence agencies have to deal with have grown in numbers and complexity, which obviously requires more resources to combat and therefore has led to the agencies growing in size as well. As the document mentions, however, these growing agencies have been held to the same scrutiny they have before, resulting in a gap between the size of the agency and the effiency of the reviewing platform.

I found it interesting that the document includes a part regarding the rise of authoritarianism in the world. While this does not directly impact our national security, the rise of unstable regimes and civil unrest may lead to more unstabel regions that could breed terrorist cells or disrupt global economies. Especially given the rise of authoritarianism in East Europe, where the leaders are more likely to support and be supported by Russia and therefore react negatively to EU endeavours. As I have discussed recently, elections in Moldova and Montenegro threaten the stability of the Balkans as a part of the EU and NATO. While Montenegro is part of NATO right now, its far-right pro-Russian regime may change that.

Reading about the National Reconnaissance Office is interesting, given that until 1992, the public was not aware of its existence. Even though two decades have passed since it became declassified, I think majority of the public is still unaware of its existence. Due to its secretive nature, people who are aware of its existence do not know much about it or its mission unlike other governmental agencies. Reading this document allows one to know more about the once classified agency and its modern prerogatives. With information technology rapidly changing with the existence of the smartphones, increasingly digitalized technology and access to the internet becoming more abundant, satelittes and digital communication have exponentially transformed since 1992, let alone since the creation of the NRO in the 1960s. As such the NRO has had to continue to transform alongside the growth of the internet to stay up to date with modern information technology.

As Americans, we obviously know about Russian infiltration into American politics and our election in 2016. Spies like Maria Butina who infiltrated the NRA in 2016 as well as anonymous Russian bots who spread misinformation on social media site like Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, are concerning threats to the security and sovereignty of the United States of America. However, the US is not the only country where Russian influence on elections has been observed. The recent election in Montenegro, which replaced the Pro-NATO, Pro-European coalition with a nationalistic, Pro-Serbian coalition, was largely influenced by Russia, with the Russian Orthodox Church mobilizing to support the Pro-Serbian coalition. Serbia is often alleged to be a Russian satelitte state in the Balkans as it continues to support Russian endevours in the Balkans and follows Russian policy (something to note is that the Serbian Orthodox Church is heavily influenced by the Russian Orthodox Church, which not only has religious influence but also political influence in Eastern Europe). The Belarusian election on August 9, while so far has not shown Russian influence, has been largely supported by the Russian government as a legitimate election, despite strong evidence otherwise. The problem with Russian infiltration and influence is that it does not infiltrate government bodies themselves but infiltrates the minds of the public with Pro-Russian propaganda and misinformation. Facebook, Twitter and Instagram allow misinformation to spread fast. Conspiracy theories are rampant and many "bot" accounts will repost each other making it seem like it is coming from a legitimate source. Many "bot" accounts take on personas and identities that make them appeal to certain audiences and seem more trustworthy. Only recently have social media sites started taking this threat seriously with crackdowns removing hundreds of accounts made to promote misinformation or certain Pro-Russian agendas.

With the world becoming more digitalized and relying more and more on cyberspace, cyberterrorism has become a real threat to security. A recent example of how large of an impact cyberthreats could play is the 2017 Equifax Data Breach, which affected more than 147 million people. Many government officials believe that this cyberattack was initiated by the Chinese government or People's Liberation Army but the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) denies these claims. This cyberattack exposed how vulnerable the American population is to an cyberattack and how dangerous it could be. If a cyberthreat hits major companies that the US population and government rely on, it could have catastrophic results on the economy, safety and privacy of US citizens.

Pillar IV largely focuses on American policy and influence in the world and is broken up into strategies for the other regions of the world. A main focus of our influence is to keep areas like Europe free while liberating areas like the Middle East or the Indo-pacific region from oppressive regimes. This document is consistent with the other three pillars as it prioritizes American economics and "America First" policies, two key goals of the current administration. I find it interesting to look at the Middle East regional strategy as a lot has changed in the three years since this document was published. ISIS and other jihadist terrorist organizations have been largely confined to just a few strongholds whereas if one looks at Afghanistan, the Taliban is gaining traction and attempting to gain legitimacy with nearby countries such as Pakistan and India. Recent challenges to our position in the Middle East such as the escalation with Iran in January 2020 and the massacres of our Kurdish allies by Turkish forces in October 2019 have put us on uneasy ground in the region.

Pillar III goes into depth on what threats and concerns the US military is fighting against as well as several strategies for deterrence and if that fails, defeating the enemy. First, the document makes clear which foreign entities provide the most danger to the United States and its allies: Russia, China, North Korea and Iran, as well as rogue states such as ISIS ad Al-Qu'ida. The document then goes over threats and priorities for the military. While obvious threats such as attacks from Russia or jihadist terrorists are mentioned, less obvious threats such as outdated nuclear infrastructure and bureaucratic delays in the Defense Industrial base are prioritized. As a continuation of Pillar II's message of rejuvenating the American economy and bringing jobs back to the United States, it is emphasized in this document that the United States should be able to produce necessary parts and "secure supply chains" capable of protecting the nation. Not only does this document prioritize improving the military but once again prioritizes improving the US economy. The document goes on to discuss new frontiers in military technology and strategy. As cyber-attacks become a more common tactic of hostility, the US military needs to adapt to and recognize cyber threats, making it a top issue. Also mentioned are innovations in space, nuclear infrastructure and intelligence. I think it is interesting that space is mentioned, given the administration's creation of a new military branch, the Space Force. The document also mentions promoting commerce in space, which may seem a few years ahead of its time, with SpaceX and BlueOrigin's drive to innovate space technology, it may be sooner than people predict.

I agree with your last statement. Renewable energy seems to be a low priority in this document while coal and natural gas are more often mentioned in this document. Other than that, there is not much in this second pillar that surprises me.

You bring up an interesting point. The current administration emphasized during the election that they would rejuvenate American business and remove the US from unfair trade deals. Since the document was written in 2017, the US has renegotiated several trade deals.

Pillar II of the National Security Strategy largely focuses on the economy and scientific innovation as essential parts to national security. The economy and subsections of it such as energy, cyberspace and scientific advances are integral to the development of any nation and therefore, a key aspect in their national security. The economy is also one of the more vulnerable aspects of our National Security Strategy. As mentioned in the document, foreign entities are eager to steal American advances in technology and science which weakens our economy. Other threats mentioned are the exportation of American jobs to other countries and businesses moving elsewhere to avoid American regulations. The author of this document makes clear that in order to bolster our economy, we must reduce regulations on scientific innovation, energy and the market while also securing the market from foreign threats. I find it interesting that this Pillar was more political than the first one, but that is largely because the two parties have widely divergent views on how the economy should be handled.

Your point on quantifying a threat we have not yet faced is an important point. This nation has not faced a virus like this since 1918 and obviously the speed of travel and therefore, contagion has drastically changed since then. As much as you can create contingency plans and prepare, dealing with an unprecedented threat as this has its obstacles. While medical experts have pointed out the weakness of our system to a pandemic and have voiced concern of the looming threat of a potential pandemic since the SARS outbreak, no one could have predicted how the pandemic would play out.

It is interesting that you mention the emphasis on terrorism. It is clear throughout the document the jihadist terrorist groups must be destroyed and that foreign terrorist groups must not be able to reach American soil. The good news is that ISIS and Al-Queda have been confined to small territories in the Middle East and North Africa. However, the rise of domestic terrorism in both our nation and our allies such as France and Germany has become a new danger that has to be handled with as much ferocity.

I like that you mentioned the "'America First' attitude towards National Security" and the contradictory nature of prioritizing American needs while also working with foreign bodies. National security needs a middle ground for the nation to defend itself from foreign threats while also working to make other nations more secure.

The National Security Strategy covers the variety of threats that this nation and its allies face. In each of these threats, the author prioritizes securing America's position as the global leader in defense emphasized in the slogan "America First". The values of this nation are frequently mentioned, and the idea of strengthening these said values (i.e making America resilient, confident and strong again) are priorities of this administration's national security strategy. It is interesting to read this document with three years of hindsight. In the three years since this document's release, we have seen a rise in domestic terrorism at home, challenges to our power in the Middle East (such as the situation with Iran in January and the Turkish attack on our Kurd allies in October) and a pandemic which resulted in economic recession and exposed the weaknesses in our healthcare system. Several points in the National Security Strategy refer to defending against bio-threats and bio-hazards, albeit most likely with the idea being that these bio-threats are deliberate attacks on our national security and not a spurious outbreak. While at the writing of this document, the nation could not have predicted which threats would have occurred and which would have not, it would be interesting to see how the pandemic played out had we emphasized supporting biomedical innovation and containing bio-threats.