Jonathan Cristol
@jonathancristol.bsky.social
I teach Middle East Politics, International Security, International Law, WMD (and stuff like that) at YU. Write about East Asia and Middle East. Ex-think-tanker. Occasional contractor. New to this platform. Love a good parenthetical aside. NYC based.
Then there’s a short section of Africa and the most abrupt ending to anything I’ve ever read. I checked a second source to make sure I didn’t just fail to download the end.
More thoughts later
More thoughts later
December 5, 2025 at 2:57 PM
Then there’s a short section of Africa and the most abrupt ending to anything I’ve ever read. I checked a second source to make sure I didn’t just fail to download the end.
More thoughts later
More thoughts later
But while it could be worse, if someone wrote this section for Middle East Politics or American Foreign Policy, and if I ignored the lack of citations (AND I WOULD NOT), it would be a C range paper with “bland platitudes” “how?” “Dated info” “you think this but do not know it” scribbled all over it.
December 5, 2025 at 2:56 PM
But while it could be worse, if someone wrote this section for Middle East Politics or American Foreign Policy, and if I ignored the lack of citations (AND I WOULD NOT), it would be a C range paper with “bland platitudes” “how?” “Dated info” “you think this but do not know it” scribbled all over it.
The Middle East section could be worse— clearly Trump thinks that the best way to crack down on radicalism is with violence.
And while I’m not a pacifist, nor am I a fan of MBS, the irony of the section is that KSA has had some success in deradicalization using education (albeit under guard).
And while I’m not a pacifist, nor am I a fan of MBS, the irony of the section is that KSA has had some success in deradicalization using education (albeit under guard).
December 5, 2025 at 2:54 PM
The Middle East section could be worse— clearly Trump thinks that the best way to crack down on radicalism is with violence.
And while I’m not a pacifist, nor am I a fan of MBS, the irony of the section is that KSA has had some success in deradicalization using education (albeit under guard).
And while I’m not a pacifist, nor am I a fan of MBS, the irony of the section is that KSA has had some success in deradicalization using education (albeit under guard).
I can’t be the only one in this field who thinks about Jerry Maguire’s manifesto on a near daily basis:
“The things we think but do not say.”
“The things we think but do not say.”
December 5, 2025 at 2:46 PM
I can’t be the only one in this field who thinks about Jerry Maguire’s manifesto on a near daily basis:
“The things we think but do not say.”
“The things we think but do not say.”
This is pretty f-ing bad.
And re: NATO. Even if you oppose NATO expansion, making opposition to NATO expansion the official policy of the US is an early Christmas gift for Putin.
And re: NATO. Even if you oppose NATO expansion, making opposition to NATO expansion the official policy of the US is an early Christmas gift for Putin.
December 5, 2025 at 2:45 PM
This is pretty f-ing bad.
And re: NATO. Even if you oppose NATO expansion, making opposition to NATO expansion the official policy of the US is an early Christmas gift for Putin.
And re: NATO. Even if you oppose NATO expansion, making opposition to NATO expansion the official policy of the US is an early Christmas gift for Putin.
Yipes.
And not just that Steven Miller probably wrote this whole thing; but “conflict between Russia and Europe” implies that the US would not be part of that conflict.
(And if you think we’d be able to stay out of a major European war, the last 120+ years says otherwise.)
And not just that Steven Miller probably wrote this whole thing; but “conflict between Russia and Europe” implies that the US would not be part of that conflict.
(And if you think we’d be able to stay out of a major European war, the last 120+ years says otherwise.)
December 5, 2025 at 2:40 PM
Yipes.
And not just that Steven Miller probably wrote this whole thing; but “conflict between Russia and Europe” implies that the US would not be part of that conflict.
(And if you think we’d be able to stay out of a major European war, the last 120+ years says otherwise.)
And not just that Steven Miller probably wrote this whole thing; but “conflict between Russia and Europe” implies that the US would not be part of that conflict.
(And if you think we’d be able to stay out of a major European war, the last 120+ years says otherwise.)
It’s a campaign speech in the guise of a strategy (or maybe the other way around, since it’s hard to call it a ‘strategy’ per se).
Having them say “the US is the most generous nation in history” following the year in which they killed US AID and countless millions of people is Orwellian in extremis.
December 5, 2025 at 2:35 PM
It’s a campaign speech in the guise of a strategy (or maybe the other way around, since it’s hard to call it a ‘strategy’ per se).
I totally agree— but you’d think something designed to be widely read wouldn’t be such a crappy piece of writing!
The new National Security Strategy is a propaganda document, designed to be widely read. It is also a performative suicide. Hard to think of another great power ever abdicating its influence so quickly and so publicly. It will be worth following the reactions around the world, not just in Europe.
Trump's national security strategy is out and some of the Europe sections are shocking. "...the growing influence of patriotic European parties indeed
gives cause for great optimism."
www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/u...
gives cause for great optimism."
www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/u...
December 5, 2025 at 2:33 PM
I totally agree— but you’d think something designed to be widely read wouldn’t be such a crappy piece of writing!
Sorry, here it is.
December 5, 2025 at 2:27 PM
Sorry, here it is.
Now, I’m completely in favor of the below paragraph re: China.
But if they really want to achieve the eminently reasonable goals below, maybe then kneecapping the WTO isn’t such a good idea.
But if they really want to achieve the eminently reasonable goals below, maybe then kneecapping the WTO isn’t such a good idea.
December 5, 2025 at 2:27 PM
Now, I’m completely in favor of the below paragraph re: China.
But if they really want to achieve the eminently reasonable goals below, maybe then kneecapping the WTO isn’t such a good idea.
But if they really want to achieve the eminently reasonable goals below, maybe then kneecapping the WTO isn’t such a good idea.
What’s interesting about this part is not that much of it appears to be padding designed to reach a predetermined word count, it’s that what follows is… [checks notes]… a section on Latin America, then a section on Asia…
December 5, 2025 at 2:22 PM
What’s interesting about this part is not that much of it appears to be padding designed to reach a predetermined word count, it’s that what follows is… [checks notes]… a section on Latin America, then a section on Asia…
“Naval Station Norfolk and other bases susceptible to extreme weather events, like STRATCOM, do not need to take measures to mitigate the impact of climate change. Instead, fight the ‘climate ideology’ that says we need to minimize the impact of climate change!”
My words.
My words.
December 5, 2025 at 2:16 PM
“Naval Station Norfolk and other bases susceptible to extreme weather events, like STRATCOM, do not need to take measures to mitigate the impact of climate change. Instead, fight the ‘climate ideology’ that says we need to minimize the impact of climate change!”
My words.
My words.
For example, why would a manufacturer move from China to Vietnam or to Sri Lanka or to wherever, if they still have to face changing tariff rates that are decided by whatever spirochete is in charge of Trump’s brain that day.
December 5, 2025 at 2:10 PM
For example, why would a manufacturer move from China to Vietnam or to Sri Lanka or to wherever, if they still have to face changing tariff rates that are decided by whatever spirochete is in charge of Trump’s brain that day.
It isn’t *just* that the Trump Tariffs are not even remotely strategic; it’s that they are counterproductive to the laudable goal of not subsidizing our own adversaries.
(And yes, I do personally check where things are made— which is why it took me literally months to settle on a new TV.)
(And yes, I do personally check where things are made— which is why it took me literally months to settle on a new TV.)
December 5, 2025 at 2:10 PM
It isn’t *just* that the Trump Tariffs are not even remotely strategic; it’s that they are counterproductive to the laudable goal of not subsidizing our own adversaries.
(And yes, I do personally check where things are made— which is why it took me literally months to settle on a new TV.)
(And yes, I do personally check where things are made— which is why it took me literally months to settle on a new TV.)
Another example of incoherence— at least in vision v reality.
December 5, 2025 at 2:10 PM
Another example of incoherence— at least in vision v reality.
So my quote above was just snark— but here’s an actual word-for-word quote:
“The future belongs to makers.”
Cripes. I don’t have a lot of faith in ChatGPT (though I use it for recipes and shopping); but obviously I’m going to ask it for a reading level assessment of this thing.
“The future belongs to makers.”
Cripes. I don’t have a lot of faith in ChatGPT (though I use it for recipes and shopping); but obviously I’m going to ask it for a reading level assessment of this thing.
December 5, 2025 at 2:03 PM
So my quote above was just snark— but here’s an actual word-for-word quote:
“The future belongs to makers.”
Cripes. I don’t have a lot of faith in ChatGPT (though I use it for recipes and shopping); but obviously I’m going to ask it for a reading level assessment of this thing.
“The future belongs to makers.”
Cripes. I don’t have a lot of faith in ChatGPT (though I use it for recipes and shopping); but obviously I’m going to ask it for a reading level assessment of this thing.
For example— “we need to be self sufficient and also to secure access to raw materials in other places and need a secure supply chain.”
December 5, 2025 at 1:59 PM
For example— “we need to be self sufficient and also to secure access to raw materials in other places and need a secure supply chain.”
Or maybe better categorized as a change in the logic of the Monroe Doctrine.
So far this strategy has two conflicting goals— isolationism but also a heavily implied “we will mess with your domestic politics anywhere and everywhere.”
So far this strategy has two conflicting goals— isolationism but also a heavily implied “we will mess with your domestic politics anywhere and everywhere.”
December 5, 2025 at 1:49 PM
Or maybe better categorized as a change in the logic of the Monroe Doctrine.
So far this strategy has two conflicting goals— isolationism but also a heavily implied “we will mess with your domestic politics anywhere and everywhere.”
So far this strategy has two conflicting goals— isolationism but also a heavily implied “we will mess with your domestic politics anywhere and everywhere.”
So the “Trump Corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine is just a slightly more overtly imperialist Monroe Doctrine.
December 5, 2025 at 1:47 PM
So the “Trump Corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine is just a slightly more overtly imperialist Monroe Doctrine.
A few pages in it is now advocating the policies of the far Right to achieve the goals of the 2000s far Left.
December 5, 2025 at 1:44 PM
A few pages in it is now advocating the policies of the far Right to achieve the goals of the 2000s far Left.
Chapter One is written by what appears to be a far Left college freshman circa. 2003-2005, albeit one with a penchant for condescension (it defines “strategy” for us) and a flirtation with the talking points of the far Right circa. now.
December 5, 2025 at 1:40 PM
Chapter One is written by what appears to be a far Left college freshman circa. 2003-2005, albeit one with a penchant for condescension (it defines “strategy” for us) and a flirtation with the talking points of the far Right circa. now.