Critics once called it isolationist. But national security experts now say Donald Trump’s ‘America First’ strategy is proving to be something else entirely — a hard-nosed policy of deterrence built on strong alliances, especially with Israel.

Fred Fleitz, vice chair of the America First Policy Institute’s Center for American Security and former chief of staff at the National Security Council, told Fox News Digital that ‘The America First approach to U.S. national security means a strong national security policy, a decisive president, keeping our nation out of unnecessary wars, having members of alliances carry their own weight, but it also means standing strongly with Israel and fighting antisemitism.’

He said supporting Israel is not about sentiment. ‘Standing with Israel is in our strategic interest,’ he said. ‘Israel is dealing with enemies in the region that the U.S. would have to deal with if it were not there. So it’s in our strategic interest.’

Israel as America’s forward defense

Mike Makovsky, CEO of the Jewish Institute for National Security of America (JINSA), said Israel effectively absorbs threats that would otherwise demand U.S. military action. ‘Historically, there are about three reasons why we have interests in the region,’ he said. ‘One is Israel. Two is oil. And three is Islamic extremism — terrorism, Shia and Sunni.’

Makovsky said it is ironic that the America First debate has resurfaced ‘only a few months after Israel smoked America’s Mideast enemies.’ He pointed to Iran’s nuclear advances and the role of its proxies. ‘They’re building ballistic missiles… They could reach the eastern seaboard of the United States,’ he said. ‘You marry missiles with nukes that could hit the U.S. — you’ve got the North Koreans on the West Coast; do you really want Iran that could hit the East Coast?’

According to Makovsky, Israel’s campaign against those threats shows the alliance’s strategic value. ‘What did the Israelis just do? They took care of it. The United States came in with the B-2 at the very end… but it was Israel that did all that work,’ he said.

He added that Israel ‘pretty much finished off Hamas,’ weakened Hezbollah — ‘which has hundreds of American soldiers’ blood on their hands’ — and continues to confront the Houthis to ‘ensure freedom of navigation.’ That, he argued, is deterrence in action: ‘As long as we support Israel, we give them some help, we give them the weapons they need, they’re really doing our work.’

Countering Iran and its allies

Fleitz called Iran ‘the biggest threat,’ encompassing ‘Iran and Iran’s proxies in the region. This includes Hamas, Hezbollah in Syria, Iran-backed militias in Iraq, and then Iran itself, with its nuclear weapons program and its sponsorship of terror.’

He said Israel’s actions have ‘destroyed Hamas proxies and significantly weakened Iran,’ adding that ‘we joined Israel in June in taking on Iran’s nuclear program, which was a threat to global security.’

Both analysts framed Iran as part of a wider axis of power alongside Russia and China, each exploiting Middle East instability to undermine U.S. influence — by fueling proxy wars, spiking energy prices, and threatening trade routes through the Gulf and the Red Sea. Fleitz said Trump’s willingness to act decisively ‘to attack Iran’s nuclear program’ exemplified using strength to prevent costlier wars later.

Energy and economic security

Both agree that energy policy is where America First becomes measurable. Fleitz said that ‘energy independence is a very important part of President Trump’s America First policy to free Americans from high energy bills.’ At the same time, he noted, energy diplomacy abroad reinforces economic security at home. ‘By pushing the Saudis — and the Saudis, I think, are happy to help us with this — to produce more oil, it may actually help us end the war in Ukraine,’ he said.

Makovsky made a similar case for regional stability: ‘The biggest threat to the Gulf Arab oil exporters … is Iran,’ he said. Without Israel’s containment of Tehran, ‘Iran would have taken over the Middle East, most likely. And if you care about oil prices, that’s not too good.’

Both experts said that when Israel shoulders the burden of defending energy corridors and trade routes, Americans save in both dollars and deployments.

Avoiding unnecessary wars

Fleitz said Trump’s doctrine is about selective force, not retreat. ‘He wants to keep our country out of new and unnecessary wars, but he will use military force prudently to defend our national security,’ he said. ‘He is going to avoid sending American troops into certain situations and using military force. But that doesn’t mean he won’t do these things when it is in U.S. strategic interests.’

He pointed out U.S. personnel who are currently stationed in Israel but ‘they’re not going to Gaza’ and ‘will not be engaging in combat operations against Hamas.’ Their mission, he said, fits the model of minimal footprint, maximum leverage.

Credibility and global deterrence

Makovsky warned that abandoning Israel would erode America’s credibility worldwide. He recalled what a senior Arab leader once told him: ‘If America doesn’t help Israel attack the nuclear facilities of Iran, it will be one of the great catastrophes.’

‘That’s because everybody in the Mideast, everyone in Asia, knows that the U.S.–Israel relationship is one of the closest in the world,’ Makovsky said. ‘If we don’t help Israel, it undercuts our credibility. The Chinese and the Russians and the North Koreans know that if we’re not going to support Israel, we’re not going to help other allies … and it would make us more vulnerable to the Chinese without a doubt.’

Peace through strength

Fleitz said Trump’s ’20-point peace plan’ for Gaza exemplifies the America First balance between toughness and diplomacy. ‘It achieved its two primary objectives, getting all the living hostages out of Israel and enacting a ceasefire,’ he said, acknowledging that ‘the ceasefire is fairly shaky.’ The next step, he added, is ‘an international stabilization force’ — a complex process still under negotiation.

For both experts, the takeaway is the same: America First doesn’t mean isolation. It means strategic partnerships that keep U.S. troops out of long wars while preserving American dominance.

Let’s put politics aside, as if that were possible, and look at how the craziness of the last few days is affecting people.

A week ago, President Donald Trump announced that the 42 million Americans on the SNAP nutrition program would not be getting their benefits — this against the backdrop of a government shutdown that has now reached its 40th day.

This against the backdrop of millions of federal workers who have not been paid while the shutdown drags on — and many of whom live paycheck to paycheck.

This against the backdrop of Trump throwing a lavish, Great Gatsby-themed Mar-a-Lago bash where guests in formal wear watched opera and feasted on blue cheese mousse, sliced beef filet, seared scallops and Trump chocolate cake.

Meanwhile, a federal judge ordered the administration to resume SNAP benefits, which cost $8.5 billion a month, but the Supreme Court gave Trump time to appeal.

And when at least nine states said they would pay for SNAP benefits during the crisis, Trump ordered them to ‘immediately undo’ any effort to provide food stamps to lower-income families — or face financial penalties.

Let’s see: how does this make the president look?

I hate this word, but what are the optics of this determined effort to stop these benefits from reaching hungry families?

After all, when a wealthy donor pal, Timothy Mellon, a banking and railroad heir, offered $130 million to ensure that American troops get paid during the shutdown, Trump seized the opportunity.

After all, the Trump tax cut was tilted toward the wealthy.

After all, Trump has further cut capital gains taxes on home sales that will mostly benefit the affluent and wealthy, enabling many to pay zero, or a reduced rate, on these sales. If you are totally unaware of this, you probably don’t qualify.

After all — this may have been the weirdest thing — Trump said Obamacare is so terrible that he wants to send people $2,000 checks so they can buy their own insurance.

But, where would they buy it, if not from an insurance company? And what would they do if the stock market plunged? There’s a reason that privatization of health insurance has never gone anywhere.

So to come back to politics (inevitably), how does any of this help Trump?

I get the notion that he’s trying to boost the pain level so that Democrats will end the shutdown on his terms.

The Democrats, who have made soaring Obamacare premiums a central part of their pitch — and fear millions will lose coverage unless expiring subsidies are extended — have hung on longer than anyone expected.

For what it’s worth, both sides deserve a ton of blame for failing to keep the lights on during this endless blame game, rather than work out a compromise, which is what we pay them to do.

But don’t Trump and JD Vance, who called the judge’s order ‘absurd,’ look like they don’t particularly care if millions of families go hungry, or are taking food from dumpsters?

Seriously, is there an alternative explanation?

Blaming the other side is fine for the usual political fun and games. But doing it during this kind of self-inflicted crisis?

With the opposition throwing out charges of cruelty, is there some nine — dimensional chess level on which this helps Trump?

Trump says former President Joe Biden ‘went totally crazy’ and handed out food stamps to ‘anybody that would ask.’ So is this liberalism gone wild? I decided to do a little digging.

Turns out there are income limits, and those in the program must meet work requirements. What’s more, the oft-repeated charge that illegal immigrants are getting SNAP benefits is simply untrue, though there are exemptions for children and refugees. (Obviously, you can never completely rule out instances of fraud.)

During the pandemic, when unemployment soared, Congress passed an emergency measure that temporarily suspended a work requirement for adults without dependents who were capable of holding jobs. This happened under … President Trump, in his first term, in 2020.

Under a deal with Republicans in 2023, work requirements for SNAP were increased. That happened under … Biden. Some Republicans, meanwhile, said the measure didn’t go far enough.

By the way, SNAP participation peaked in the fall of 2017, under Trump, which was related to hurricane emergencies.

Sorry for the green-eyeshade stuff, but I thought it was worth more research.

Most people don’t have the time or interest in excavating the details. They just know they aren’t getting the food aid they expected and that neither are millions of other lower-income families. And especially with his dogged determination to block the states from helping out, many are holding Trump accountable.

Republican Rep. Riley Moore said the United States could take a range of actions — including sanctions and ‘even kinetic military action’ — in response to what he called the ‘genocide’ of Christians in Nigeria.

Trump designated Moore, a member of the Appropriations Committee from West Virginia, along with Chairman Tom Cole, R-Okla., to lead an investigation into the killing of Christians by Islamist militants in the African nation.

Frustrations with the matter boiled out into the open when Trump this week designated Nigeria as a country of particular concern and ordered the Pentagon to prepare to intervene militarily.

In a video on Truth Social this week, Trump threatened to ‘do things to Nigeria that Nigeria is not going to be happy about’ and ‘go into that now-disgraced country guns-a-blazing.’

Moore told Fox News Digital the designation unlocks ’15 different levers’ the administration can use against Nigeria, including halting arms sales, freezing aid and sanctioning officials or institutions accused of ignoring or enabling religious killings.

‘All options are on the table here for this, even kinetic military action,’ Moore said. ‘That could mean targeted, strategic counterterrorism strikes to get rid of some of the top leadership if that’s what it takes to stop the killing.’

‘We’ve been providing security assistance to this country since at least 2009 – billions of dollars worth of arm sales, training and equipment that they’ve received. And it’s a question of prioritization in what’s important to them. And clearly this has not been one of the most important things.’

The West Virginia Republican said he has been working with the House Appropriations Committee and the State Department to identify what he called ‘legislative levers’ that could support the administration’s response. Moore said he’s also consulting with NGOs and Christian organizations ‘on the ground’ in Nigeria to document the scale of the violence.

He described the attacks as a ‘genocide,’ claiming Christians are being killed at a rate of five to one compared with non-Christians. Moore accused Nigeria’s government of ‘looking the other way’ despite receiving billions in U.S. security aid since 2009.

‘They’re not taking this seriously,’ he said. ‘We had a pastor warn the government about an impending attack — they called it fake news. Within 24 hours, that pastor and 20 of his congregants were murdered.’

The Nigerian government denies a genocide is taking place. ‘Portraying Nigeria’s security challenges as a targeted campaign against a single religious group is a gross misrepresentation of reality. Terrorists attack all who reject their murderous ideology — Muslims, Christians, and those of no faith alike,’ the office of the presidency wrote on X. 

Moore said he and House Appropriations Chairman Tom Cole, R-Okla., plan to meet with Nigerian officials in Washington this month as part of the investigation, and may even send delegations to the nation. He added that the U.S. could still work with Nigeria’s government if it shows a willingness to confront extremist groups.

‘It’s not all sticks here — there are some carrots in this,’ Moore said. ‘If they’re willing to work with us, this could actually lead to a stronger relationship between our countries.’

The Nigerian government has denied that the killings amount to religious persecution, arguing that extremist and criminal groups target civilians of all faiths.

With a population of more than 230 million, Nigeria’s vibrant and often turbulent cities and villages are home to people of strikingly diverse backgrounds. The country’s more than 500 languages and mix of Islam, Christianity, and traditional indigenous faiths have long been marred by tension.

Nigeria’s faith communities remain sharply divided, with Muslims dominating the northern regions and Christians concentrated in the south.

Christianity took firm root in the 19th century, when freed slaves educated in Sierra Leone returned home as teachers and missionaries — establishing schools, churches, and early congregations that continue to shape southern Nigeria’s identity today.

Despite vast oil and mineral wealth, decades of corruption and mismanagement have left much of the nation impoverished.

Nigeria’s growing cache of lithium, cobalt, nickel, and other rare minerals has drawn quiet U.S. attention as Washington looks to counter China’s dominance in Africa’s critical-minerals market. The Commerce Department and U.S. International Development Finance Corp. have eyed investment opportunities in Nigeria’s nascent lithium industry, but persistent insecurity in mining regions threatens Western access and future development.

For over a decade, Nigeria’s Christians fleeing the nation’s northern half have been subject to the violence of Boko Haram, an Islamist militant group known for its terrorist spectacles. Churches and homes burned, communities vanishing in the group’s night raids.

Numbers are difficult to verify, but the International Society for Civil Liberties and Rule of Law reports at least 52,000 Christians have been killed, some 18,500 abducted and unlikely to have survived, and 20,000 churches and Christian schools attacked between 2009 and 2023.

In 2014, Boko Haram famously kidnapped and enslaved 276 teenage girls in a raid on a high school dormitory. The group regularly arms children as suicide bombers and holds slave markets in captured territories.

But a direct U.S. military campaign would prove difficult with current U.S. assets in the nation and is unlikely, one defense official told Fox News Digital.

The United States currently has no permanent military base in Nigeria, though small teams of U.S. advisors and special operations trainers work periodically with Nigerian forces under AFRICOM programs.

Washington approved about $600 million in security aid to Nigeria over the past decade, mostly focused on counterterrorism in the northeast.

The Trump administration on Friday intensified its dispute with South Africa, saying no U.S. government official will attend the G20 Summit in Johannesburg in protest of what it describes as state-backed discrimination against White Afrikaners.

‘The lives and property of Afrikaners have been endangered by politicians who incite race-based violence against them, threaten to confiscate their farms without compensation, and prop up a corrupt race-based scoring system that discriminates against Afrikaners in employment,’ State Department Deputy Principal spokesperson Tommy Piggott told Fox News Digital.

‘South Africa must immediately end all government-sponsored discrimination against Afrikaners and condemn those who seek to ignite racial violence against them.’

Trump wrote on Truth Social on Friday that it’s a ‘total disgrace’ the G20, scheduled for Nov. 22 to Nov. 23, will be held in South Africa.

‘Afrikaners (People who are descended from Dutch settlers, and also French and German immigrants) are being killed and slaughtered, and their land and farms are being illegally confiscated,’ the president said. ‘No U.S. Government Official will attend as long as these Human Rights abuses continue. I look forward to hosting the 2026 G20 in Miami, Florida!’

Afrikaners have faced increasing hostility from some politicians who have called for violence against them and the threat of land confiscation.

South Africa’s Expropriation Act of 2024 allows the government to take land for public use, including in some cases without compensation — a policy the government says is aimed at addressing racial inequities in ownership, but one that critics warn could unfairly affect White Afrikaner farmers.

Trump confronted South African President Cyril Ramaphosa at the White House in May, pressing him on ‘White genocide’ in the country. Ramaphosa vehemently denied the claims. 

‘There is just no genocide in South Africa,’ he said. ‘We cannot equate what is alleged to be genocide to what we went through in the struggle because people were killed because of the oppression that was taking place in our country. So you cannot equate that.’

Trump played a video in the Oval Office of white crosses along a highway that he said depicted burial sites of White farmers.

‘Have they told you where that is, Mr. President?’ Ramaphosa asked. ‘I’d like to know where that is because this I’ve never seen.’

A senior State Department official told Fox News Digital that the Trump administration set a refugee cap for fiscal year 2026 of 7,500, with a majority of the spots reserved for Afrikaners fleeing what it describes as government-sponsored race-based discrimination in South Africa.

One year ago, Donald Trump won a transformative election victory, sweeping all seven swing states, the popular vote, and moving all fifty states redder than they were in 2020.

How did he do it?

By motivating men, young men in particular, and sports fans who were fed up with the insanity of men winning women’s sports championships. I wrote about the victory in my new book, ‘Balls,’ which was released on Tuesday.  

The book addresses the landslide Trump victory, but it also asks an important question when looking forward prospectively: Now that Trump, unfortunately, isn’t able to run for reelection, how do Republicans ensure that the Trump MAGA coalition extends, and even grows, beyond his own presidency?

In 2024, the two most conservative voting groups in America were male senior citizens and young men under the age of thirty.

This has never happened before in any of our lives.

It was a cultural transformation overnight.

Trump also won record support among White, Black, Asian and Hispanic men as well, but that same momentum didn’t extend to 2025. Indeed, Tuesday’s voting results paint an ominous picture of what 2026 and 2028 could look like if young men aren’t motivated to show up and vote like they did in 2024. 

Consider the numbers: in 2024, Trump received 1.968 million votes in New Jersey and 2.075 million votes in Virginia. While he lost both states by narrow margins to Kamala Harris — by roughly 5% — he received more votes than the Virginia Democrat candidate for governor, Abigail Spanberger — who won Virginia with 1.961 million votes — and the New Jersey Democrat candidate for governor, Mikie Sherrill — who won New Jersey with 1.792 million votes. 

So how did both Democratic gubernatorial candidates win election comfortably despite receiving fewer votes than Trump did in their states a year ago? Yes, partly because it was an off-year cycle and overall turnout trended down, but they won comfortably because roughly 600,000 Trump voters didn’t show up to vote in 2025 who did show up to vote in 2024.

Who are these voters?

Young men, sports fans, blue collar workers, the Trump MAGA base that will come out to support Trump when he’s on the ballot, but won’t show up when he’s not on the ballot.

So will these voters return in 2026 and in 2028 when Trump isn’t on the ballot? That depends on how well future Republican candidates speak to these voters. Some of y’all will think I’m crazy for telling you this, but as soon as the 2026 mid-term elections are over, expect a pivot so rapid it will make your head spin — Democrats in 2027 will all argue that Trump’s unique political gifts end with him, that MAGA is over without Trump as its leader. Yep, from ‘He’s Hitler!’ to ‘He’s the most talented Republican president in any of our lifetimes,’ almost overnight.

I’m telling you, it’s coming.

Because Democrats are going to bank on Trump as a political unicorn, a candidate so talented that only he could power a coalition as substantial as he won in 2024.

So what do Republicans need to do to extend and even grow Trump’s appeal with young men? I think it’s a combination of three things, wed the policy and the personal together, as Trump has been uniquely talented at doing.

1. On the policy front, the 2024 election was about the economy, the border, and crime

It was as easy as EBC.

Trump won the arguments on all three of these fronts. So far, Trump 2.0 has ended the border as an issue by ending illegal immigration and driven crime down to record lows in many states and cities. His challenge on the economy is that Biden was so bad, it’s taking time to clean up his mess. With record high stock prices and record low gas prices, Trump is delivering for all of us with stock market assets and all of us who have to fill up our tanks.

But there’s a lingering anger over how much goods cost. Even I feel it each time I buy a Chick-fil-A meal for my family and it costs over $50. For fast food, really!

Prices went up so fast under President Joe Biden that the sticker shock is still real even in 2025. Trump has stopped the rapid price increases and, in the case of some purchases like gas, has actually brought them back lower than they were during Biden, but that bitter aftertaste of inflation takes time to wear off.

So far it hasn’t.

2. Focus on men in women’s sports

Is it the most important issue in the country?

No.

But it crystallizes the absurdity of Democrat policies for young men and sports fans, who provided the fuel to Trump’s record win in 2024.

If you believe a man should be able to win a women’s sports championship, how can I trust your opinion on anything? As I wrote in ‘Balls,’ this issue, combined with EBC, won Trump the election in 2024. 

I think that will still be the message in 2026, too, because, amazingly, Democrats have doubled and tripled down on defending men in women’s sports all over the country.

This issue isn’t going away.

3. HAVE FUN and BE ENTERTAINING.

My two favorite moments of the 2024 campaign were when Trump dressed up as a McDonald’s employee and as a garbage man and rode around in a garbage truck.

Was it absurd and ridiculous?

Of course.

But the number one gift Trump has that he receives zero credit for is this: HE’S FUNNY!

Yes, politics are serious. But they should also be fun. Trump is a happy warrior and happy warriors win.

The two most successful Republican presidents of my life were Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump. Both were, in many respects, professional entertainers. They knew how to cut through the noise and were authentic in the way they did so.

Trump isn’t perfect, none of us are, but he’s the most comfortable president in his own skin that any of us have ever seen and he has tremendous political instincts.

You can spend a hundred million on an ad campaign and not get the free media attention that Trump did, scooping out fries and talking with voters at the drive-thru in Pennsylvania. That style of politicking is unbeatable. Heck, I would argue the best version of Trump is the one you get in fast food restaurants. He genuinely loves getting out and interacting with people. That’s a skill that can’t be taught, but it can be emulated.

We used to ask the question, which candidate would you rather have a beer with? While Trump doesn’t drink — as he’s jokingly said, can you imagine what he’d say if he drank? — he’s authentic and real. As artificial intelligence takes over much of the country, I believe authenticity will become the most important political key to the realm.

Young people in particular, who are steeped in social media artificiality fed to them constantly on their phones, have an innate sense of when they’re being poll-tested and marketed to, they sniff it out better than older voters.

If you want them to show up and support you, you have to win their trust.

Which is why I truly believe the election was over when it came to male voters when Trump was shot in Butler, Pennsylvania.

In that moment, having escaped death by half an inch, Trump, whose critics had labeled him a phony, rose up and screamed, ‘Fight, fight, fight!’ three times. At that instant, the election was over for male voters.

It was the bravest presidential moment of my life.

But it was also one of the most authentic.

In times of great peril, your own personal character is revealed. In those perilous milliseconds, Trump became a legend and won the election.

He proved once and for all he had ‘Balls.’

And so far no Democrat has proven that they do.

So long as that remains the case, Republicans aren’t going to lose men.

Which is why the best example of an oxymoron in America today isn’t ‘jumbo shrimp,’ it’s ‘masculine Democrat.’

Because after all, there are certainly big shrimp, but there are still no masculine democrats.

Clay Travis is the author of the new book, ‘Balls: How Trump, Young Men and Sports Fans Saved America.’ Buy it here.