The Lawfare Podcast

Rational Security: The “Adverse Possession” Edition

Date: December 10, 2025
Host: Scott R. Anderson
Guests: Tyler McBrien, Alex Zurdin

Episode Overview

In this edition of Rational Security, Scott R. Anderson is joined by Tyler McBrien and Alex Zurdin to dissect the week's top national security developments. This episode focuses on three substantial topics:

1. Syria's Transformation Post-Assad: One year after Bashar al-Assad's departure, the team evaluates Syria’s journey, international legitimacy, sanctions relief, and daunting obstacles ahead.
2. Trump Administration’s National Security Strategy: The group analyzes the release and substance of the Trump administration’s latest national security strategy, its thematic innovations, and what it reveals about evolving U.S. policy.
3. JPMorgan/Dimon’s $1.5 Trillion National Security Investment Initiative: They look at the motives and potential impacts of a major private sector commitment to industries deemed critical to U.S. national security.

The hosts bring a candid and insightful tone, weaving in humor and expertise, with memorable quotes and sharp exchanges throughout.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. One Year After Assad: Syria’s Unlikely Transformation

[04:19–15:29]

• Unexpected Progress:
  Alex emphasizes how the rapid transition in Syria was “nothing short of remarkable.” Western governments, regional players, and even the U.S. did not anticipate the regime change and its aftermath.

  "No one saw this coming, I think at a collective level from the blob here in D.C., from foreign capitals, or even in the region." – Alex Zurdin [08:02]

• Sanctions & International Legitimacy:
  The U.S. and international community have moved swiftly to lift sanctions, offer economic reprieve, and initiate official recognition pathways, surpassing even what the panel envisaged a year prior.

  • Executive order 14312 ended national emergencies that enabled key sanctions.
  • The Caesar Act’s secondary sanctions are a current congressional debate point, with its repeal considered a major achievement.

• Economic Recovery—Challenges Remain:
  While international financial institutions and companies (Visa, Mastercard, Binance) are signaling interest, Syria’s economic recovery is hampered by war damage, infrastructure decay, and a persistent centralized, family-controlled model:

  “We're starting to see indications of a very closely held, centralized, tightly controlled economy and administration by President Alshara.” – Alex Zurdin [10:54]

• Regional Dynamics:
  Scott explores the intense pressures from Israel (ongoing military occupation and strikes in southern Syria) and Turkey (contending with the Syrian Democratic Forces autonomy), calling Syria’s environment “a really complicated picture.”

  “It is a really difficult set of challenges, and that intersects with all of these domestic challenges because Syria is a super diverse country and involves identities and political groups that break across all those borders.” – Scott R. Anderson [23:44]

• U.S. Policy and the “Trump Factor”:
  Trump’s unpredictability, personal influence, and focus on short-term gains have been pivotal, but with his political capital possibly waning, the panel questions the durability of U.S. engagement:

  “Trump has a short memory. …If he sees a financial incentive there for some sort of development, then he's willing to cast aside other ideological considerations.” – Tyler McBrien [25:22] “There wasn't a huge Syria constituency… so he was given a tremendous amount of deference by his caucus to really settle an interagency, intergovernmental, cross-branch debate.” – Alex Zurdin [27:09]

• Transitional Justice & Reconstruction:
  Tyler adds, alongside security and economics, true accountability for the Assad regime’s atrocities is now on the agenda in a way it never was before, making the political settlement even more complex.

  “True accountability in Syria seems to be necessary for the country to move on.” – Tyler McBrien [29:30]

Notable Moment:
Scott shares an emotional story of Syrian-American colleagues visiting family for the first time in years, highlighting the fragile hope suffusing post-Assad Syria [35:27].

2. Trump Administration’s New National Security Strategy

[41:43–56:22]

• Strange Form and Content:
  The strategy is described as “a very odd document” with peculiar structure and narrative, beginning with introspective questions rather than substantive policy.

  “It starts with these questions… I almost expected it to start like, ‘Merriam-Webster's dictionary defines strategy as…’” – Tyler McBrien [43:05]

• Centrality of Border Security & Ethnonationalism:
  Tyler and Scott highlight bracing sections tying border security and “civilizational self-confidence” to national security. The document’s rhetoric veers into “great replacement” territory, with undertones of blood and soil ideology.

  “That coupled with… civilizational collapse and the threat that migration has… gets into this sort of blood and soil territory that I don't feel great about.” – Tyler McBrien [44:40]

• Economic Statecraft & Policy Inconsistency:
  Though the document’s economic antagonism toward China is prominent, actions often contradict rhetoric (ex: Nvidia chip sale to China).

  “So there are about four pages about economic competition with China… and then this same week, the president just announced a major deal to sell H200 Nvidia chips to China…” – Alex Zurdin [45:47]

• Ambiguity Over Policy Significance:
  The group debates whether the strategy should be read as a real roadmap, a rubber-stamp exercise, or a rhetorical performance for Congress. Scott and Alex suggest this reflects varied, sometimes incompatible, influences inside Trump-world.

  “Who the hell wrote this thing? I have no idea. It's not Marco Rubio, I'll tell you that right now.” – Scott R. Anderson [48:29]

• Absence of “Great Power Competition”:
  The strategy eschews now-standard language describing the U.S.-China/Russia rivalry, signaling a move toward a “spheres of influence” mindset and prioritizing domestic interests over alliance or global leadership.

  “There’s two words, three words… central in the Biden strategy… that don’t appear… ‘major power competition.’” – Scott R. Anderson [51:37]

• Unclear Authors, Internal Contradictions:
  The team notes the absence of key ideological figures (Elbridge Colby, Asia hands) and the document's bizarre omission of named Asian allies, signaling internal struggles for influence.

  “It never names Asian allies. It doesn't talk about the Philippines and Japan… It’s such an odd document. The chapters just don’t line up.” – Scott R. Anderson [54:27]

3. JPMorgan Chase and Jamie Dimon’s $1.5 Trillion National Security Investment

[56:22–66:07]

• Private Sector-Led National Security Investment:
  Jamie Dimon's announcement of a 10-year, $1.5 trillion investment in U.S. national security-relevant industries is interpreted as both savvy corporate strategy and a marker of new public-private collaboration.

  • JPMorgan is drawing in blue-chip figures (Condoleezza Rice, Robert Gates, Jeff Bezos) for credibility.
  • The initiative is being presented as interest-driven, not a political overture to Trump, although it aligns with “America First” objectives.

• Motives and Political Positioning:
  Scott sees this as less an attempt to cozy up to Trump and more of an effort to shape/reserve a conventional foreign policy voice in the increasingly MAGA-dominated political sphere.

  "A more conventional alternative center of influence in this space. To say we're going to lead this initiative, we're going to steer what we think is key to US national security." – Scott R. Anderson [61:18]

• Pre-Emptive Autonomy:
  Alex posits JPMorgan’s move as a way to “pre-but” potential pressure from the administration, giving them freedom to select investments in line with their own and national interests, while retaining negotiating leverage with government.

  “They've already created an independent basis… they could say, look, we'd love to do that, but we're already committed on these other initiatives that are aligned with what you want us to do.” – Alex Zurdin [64:34]

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the stunning changes in Syria:

  “The transition over the past year is nothing short of remarkable… there is this phenomenal change that has occurred.” – Alex Zurdin [08:02]

• On the new U.S. posture:

  “The Trump factor can open up new lanes of what were previously closed-off or commonly held assumptions about U.S. foreign policy…” – Tyler McBrien [24:53]

• On the contradictions of the Trump strategy:

  “It’s this confusing mix… we’re not in the unipolar moment anymore and that the US can’t be the hegemon, but then still have some of the chest-thumping and most powerful military kind of language, which are inherently at odds.” – Tyler McBrien [55:34]

• On JPMorgan’s new board:

  “…they brought in former Secretary Robert Gates, they brought in former Secretary Condoleezza Rice, former Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, again Jeff Bezos, and really a who’s who of American capitalism and American public policy, defense, national security…” – Alex Zurdin [58:50]

Key Timestamps

• Syria’s post-Assad developments: [04:19–15:29]
• Regional and domestic challenges in Syria: [15:29–35:37]
• Trump administration political calculus on Syria: [24:53–32:27]
• Transitional justice and the limits of U.S. engagement: [29:30–35:37]
• National Security Strategy analysis: [41:43–56:22]
• JPMorgan’s $1.5 trillion initiative: [56:22–66:07]

Tone and Style

The conversation is substantive, analytical, and fast-paced, flavored by both wit and deep policy expertise. The panelists vacillate between skepticism, cautious optimism, and sharp critique—particularly when dissecting administration policy and strategy documents. Pop culture asides and inside jokes add levity to otherwise complex and occasionally grim subject matter.

Conclusion

This episode of Rational Security provides an in-depth look at a turning point for U.S. policy: the ongoing political gamble in Syria, the Trump administration’s redefined (and ambiguous) strategic doctrine, and early signs of a more aggressive private-sector role in safeguarding national security interests. The conversation reveals both the promise and the peril of U.S. national security policy at the crossroads of shifting politics and enduring global challenges.