The Trump administration released a 16-page counterterrorism strategy that identifies drug cartels, Islamic terror groups, and left-wing domestic organizations as primary threats while making no mention of far-right extremists, drawing sharp criticism from security experts who call the document partisan and incomplete.

Unusual Targets on Terror Watch

The memo identifies three major categories of terror threats, with the first focused on narcoterrorists and transnational gangs that the administration has prioritized since Trump’s second term began. However, the strategy takes an unprecedented turn by listing the former Biden administration, transgender Americans, and antifa among threats to public safety. The Guardian analysts described the document as bizarre, while security professionals questioned its credibility given the glaring omissions of groups responsible for deadly domestic violence over the past two decades.

Security Experts Sound Alarm

National security professionals dismissed the strategy as ineffective and politically motivated. Colin Clarke, director of the Soufan Center security think tank, criticized the approach on social media, writing that the memo represents the opposite of speaking softly and carrying a big stick. Clarke characterized it as yelling loudly to conceal a small stick, warning that the transparent partisan nature undermines American credibility with both allies and adversaries. Multiple analysts used terms like slop and gaslighting to describe what they view as an exercise in political theater rather than serious counterterrorism planning.

Critical Gaps Raise Questions

The strategy’s failure to address far-right extremism stands in stark contrast to assessments from Congress and federal law enforcement agencies, which have consistently identified these groups as responsible for some of the deadliest acts of political violence in recent years. Security experts argue the memo provides little clarity on how the administration plans to address legitimate threats, instead focusing on political adversaries. The document’s inclusion of the previous administration and specific demographic groups as security threats marks a departure from traditional counterterrorism frameworks that focus on violent actions rather than political opposition or identity categories.