Podcast Summary: Statecraft with Santi Ruiz Episode: How the National Security Strategy Gets Made
Guest: Nadia Schadlow, Former Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategy, Lead Architect of the 2017 National Security Strategy
Date: March 12, 2026

Episode Overview

This episode of Statecraft dives deeply into the making of the U.S. National Security Strategy (NSS), the flagship document that periodically reframes America’s global objectives, priorities, and approach. Host Santi Ruiz is joined by Nadia Schadlow, principle author of the 2017 NSS, to deconstruct what the NSS is, how it’s produced, how competing power centers shape it, and what it accomplishes—both internally for policymakers and as a signal to the world. The conversation ranges from the nuts-and-bolts mechanics of policy process to the strategic evolution across administrations, finishing with Schadlow’s personal reading recommendations and reflections on time as a crucial strategic factor.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. What is a National Security Strategy? (03:00–05:00)

• Purpose of Strategy: It is not merely about "ways, ends, and means," but fundamentally about "explaining to the American people the direction that a country is going in" (Nadia, 02:52). It frames the president's objectives based on a reading of the world and communicates national direction.
• Coalition Building: Strategy documents must build consensus: “No one person can actually implement very much in this country...problems require sustained implementation. And that goes back to why you have to create coalitions” (Nadia, 03:40).

2. Origins & Nature of the NSS as a Consensus Document (04:39–06:24)

• The NSS is a “multi-party creation in a democracy because essentially they are about coalition building” (Nadia, 02:52).
• Critics often dismiss NSSs as “consensus documents produced through ‘least common denominator bargaining’,” but Schadlow sees coalition as essential for any strategy to work (04:39).
• Drafters act as synthesizers and editors, balancing input from various “power nodes in government” (Nadia, 06:24).

“If you’re just reflecting one point of view that’s not reflective of key other power nodes in government, you’re not likely to see progress…and people just won’t do anything.” —Nadia (06:10)

3. The Policy Process: Who Shapes the NSS? (06:24–13:15)

• Power centers include Treasury (more dovish on China), NSC/Defense (China hawks), State Department, and others, each with distinct interests and perspectives.
• Example: Internal debates like drones vs. aircraft carriers are reflected only obliquely in strategic language (adjectives matter!) and are wrestled with in detail in subordinate documents (Nadia, 08:21–09:47).
• Paper Drops and Agenda Setting: The first “paper on the table” provides an “advantage in the interagency process” (Nadia, 10:09).
• Even as lead author, some battles are lost: e.g., “Climate change was not mentioned in the 2017 document...it wasn’t a priority for President Trump” (Nadia, 11:06).
• Example of consensus & discord: minimal conflict overall, but notable issues—like the lack of emphasis on the European Union—were points of contention (11:51–13:08).

4. Messaging, Structure, and Strategic Signaling (13:15–16:38)

• Country/regional mentions are significant to signal priorities externally, but internal realities mean that not every country will be named.
• The document’s structure traditionally includes regional laundry lists partially to flag strategic interests and reassure or clarify relations to partners, allies, and rivals (Nadia, 14:17, 15:58).

"It was a definitive kind of pushback to a view that this would be an isolationist administration." —Nadia (15:41)

5. Meeting Mechanics and Decision-Making (16:38–28:26)

• Interagency Process: Overused and “blobby,” often endless—success depends on clear agendas, timely meetings, and quality mini-papers from stakeholders (Nadia, 19:46).
• Nadia hosted ~12 significant meetings, expecting meaningful input in the form of short papers addressing complex concepts (sovereignty, terrorism, etc.) (22:38).
• Effective meetings require:
  • Short papers
  • Purpose-driven agendas (“The purpose of this meeting is…”)
  • Inclusion (without domination by any one participant)
  • A balance of informational and decision-making meetings (24:09).
• Paper Drops & Editorial Tactics: Agencies sometimes attempt to control discussion by dropping their own material at meetings (State, as with Secretary Tillerson) (25:55). Schadlow sometimes circulated drafts as PDFs to avoid “gobbledygooking” from excessive edits: "I didn’t want it to get all gobbledygooked up, you know, where everyone’s throwing in random words and crazy adjectives…" (Nadia, 27:04).

6. Utility and Impact of the NSS (28:26–33:15)

• The NSS provides political cover (“White House political imprimatur”) for agencies and departments; its value is as a “consolidated statement of interests and goals” for internal and external use (Nadia, 29:01, 30:55).
• For Congress, while not part of the drafting, the strategy provides a tool for engagement and negotiation; some informal Hill consultations occur (Nadia, 31:43–33:04).

“It gives you kind of the COVID of what you need to tell the people. And also Congress, like this is a priority. And then you get into the rolling up your sleeves and the fighting and how to do it and how to appropriate the money.” —Nadia (30:10)

7. Comparing 2017 and 2025 NSS: Evolving Tone and Substance (33:15–43:25)

• Tone: The new (2025) NSS is “probably more confrontational, probably more angry...more frustration maybe expressed in this document” (Nadia, 34:15).
• Content: Many core areas are the same: protection of the homeland, economic growth, military strength, balance of power, burden sharing, and significance of allies and partners—especially in the Indo-Pacific (34:15–35:19).
• Strategic Language: Both use realism and deterrence, with some terminology updated (“flexible realism” in 2025) (35:58–37:19).
• Nadia and Santi discuss the visibility and function of strategic concepts across documents, e.g., the elevation of “strategic competitor” for China in 2017 vs. more ambiguous signaling in 2025 to keep negotiating options open (38:12–41:12).
• Segment on the conspicuous absence of direct reference to North Korea in 2025—a possible reflection of strategic ambiguity or unsettled internal views (41:12–42:29).

8. Reflections on Process, Content, and “Forgotten Dimensions” (45:05–51:41)

• Time and Strategic Depth: Schadlow expounds on the critical—but often ignored—importance of time in strategy: how long things actually take, and why this can be a source of strategic weakness if not actively managed (45:38–48:20, 48:55–51:41).
• Example: “It shouldn’t take decades to develop a particular weapon system or to integrate something into our Defense Department” (Nadia, 48:55).
• The military’s logistical focus often fails to translate into broader strategic timelines or “Gantt chart” thinking (49:05).

“We like to talk about strategy at the big level...but there are all these concrete inputs, logistics...These forgotten dimensions...I thought, time really is a forgotten dimension...We no longer have the excuse of saying, well, we don’t really know how long it takes…” —Nadia (47:25)

9. Recommended Reading: Understanding Russia (51:41–56:58)

• Key Authors: Adam Ulam, Richard Pipes, Stephen Kotkin
• Biographies: Focus on Tukhachevsky, and studies on the Russian general staff.
• Visualization: Minard’s graph depicting Napoleon’s invasion of Russia, as referenced in the Atlantic and in Edward Tufte’s work on graphical information (54:56).
• Russian Literature: Dostoevsky’s Demons, Nobel Laureate Svetlana Alexievich’s Secondhand Time.
• Santi shares his own reading list for 2026; Nadia recommends including contemporary Russian authors and, by analogy, reading contemporary culture to understand a country.

“I think it’s important because even in today’s discussion about Ukraine...how they think about Ukraine as being very important for the way Putin thinks about Ukraine.” —Nadia (52:25)

10. Book Clubs and Personal Reading Philosophy (56:58–57:24)

• Schadlow’s take: "I’m not a big book club fan...To me, reading is a very personal, lovely, you know, way to spend time. And it just. I need it to be completely mine."

Notable Quotes & Moments

• On Coalition-Building: “Strategy making and articulation is not a science. There isn’t one way to do it. There isn’t even an established formula for doing it.” —Nadia (05:04)
• On Process Gamesmanship: “If you can be the first one to put the piece of paper down...you have a competitive advantage in the interagency process.” —Nadia (10:09)
• On Editorial Control: “Leverage is like the favorite verb of the Washington policy community...it just...doesn’t actually mean anything.” —Nadia (27:04)
• On the Value of the NSS: “It gives you kind of the...political imprimatur to say, let’s go and do this. The President said we need to do this.” —Nadia (29:01)
• On Tone in the 2025 NSS: “It’s probably more confrontational, probably more angry. There’s more frustration maybe expressed in this document.” —Nadia (34:15)
• On the Omission of North Korea: “Is it omission due to process...or is it deliberate?...Keeping the opportunity to communicate about it open…” —Nadia (41:29)
• On Time as Strategy: “It shouldn’t take decades to develop a particular weapon system....If you evaluate [time] as something that’s really important...the more you focus on it and maybe you chip away at it.” —Nadia (48:55)
• On Book Clubs: “I’m not a big book club fan. I don’t like to be forced to read. I like suggestions...to me, reading is a very personal way to spend time.” —Nadia (56:59)

Timestamps for Major Segments

• 00:05–03:00 – Introduction; overview of guest and topic
• 03:00–06:24 – What is an NSS? Purpose and coalition-building
• 06:24–13:15 – Power centers, interagency debates, and process
• 13:15–16:38 – Structuring the NSS and signaling priorities
• 16:38–28:26 – How the interagency process actually works; running meetings; editorial control
• 28:26–33:15 – Utility of the NSS: internal and external functions; Congress’ informal role
• 33:15–43:25 – Comparing the 2017 and 2025 NSSs; tone, content, evolution
• 43:25–45:05 – NATO, Greenland, and policy substance
• 45:05–51:41 – Time as a “forgotten dimension” of strategy; logistics and implementation
• 51:41–56:58 – Recommended readings and Russian studies
• 56:59–57:24 – Philosophy of reading and book clubs

Final Thoughts

This episode offers a rare inside view of the strategy-making process at the highest levels of U.S. government, offering practical lessons in coalition-building, bureaucratic politics, and the enduring challenge of bridging grand rhetoric and implementation. Schadlow’s reflections on the importance of time, clarity, and coalition in policymaking offer valuable insight for both practitioners and observers of statecraft. Her candid discussion, peppered with process trivia and reading suggestions, makes this a valuable listen for anyone interested in how policy really gets made—and how the words on the page turn into action (or don’t).

For further reading and resources, see the episode notes at www.statecraft.pub.