National Security Presidential Memorandum

National Security Presidential Memorandum
Name	National Security Presidential Memorandum
Caption	Presidential directive issuance
Date created	2017
Jurisdiction	United States
Author	President of the United States
Related	Presidential Study Directive; Executive Order; National Security Strategy

Contents

National Security Presidential Memorandum

A National Security Presidential Memorandum is a category of presidential directive used to communicate national security priorities from the President of the United States to the United States National Security Council, United States Department of Defense, Central Intelligence Agency, United States Department of State, and other executive organizations such as the Department of Homeland Security, United States Department of Energy, and United States Agency for International Development. The instrument succeeded prior documents and interacts with frameworks like the National Security Strategy, the Presidential Policy Directive, and the Homeland Security Presidential Directive system. Its issuance affects policy decisions involving actors such as the Secretary of Defense, the Director of National Intelligence, the Secretary of State, and the Attorney General.

Overview

NSPMs provide presidential instructions on matters including foreign policy execution involving United States Congress oversight, military planning with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, intelligence collection under the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and sanctions administration in coordination with the United States Department of the Treasury. They reference interdepartmental entities such as the National Security Council staff, White House Counsel, Office of Management and Budget, and agencies like the Federal Bureau of Investigation and National Reconnaissance Office. NSPMs interface with multilateral commitments involving partners such as NATO, United Nations, European Union, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and bilateral relationships with states like China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, and Israel.

The legal basis for NSPMs derives from the constitutional powers vested in the President of the United States as Commander-in-Chief under the United States Constitution, and from statutory authorities such as the National Security Act of 1947, the Insider Threat Program, and defense appropriation statutes enacted by the United States Congress. Classification and declassification protocols reference the National Archives and Records Administration, the Information Security Oversight Office, and the Presidential Records Act. NSPMs may be marked under classification standards set by the Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of Defense and involve entities governed by the Freedom of Information Act and judicial review in courts like the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and the Supreme Court of the United States when disputes arise.

Preparation typically involves staff work by the National Security Council staff, policy directors from the Council on Foreign Relations-engaged experts, and interagency drafting groups including the Defense Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency, and policy offices of the Department of State. Review cycles include input from principals—Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, Attorney General, and the Director of National Intelligence—and final clearance from the White House Chief of Staff and White House Counsel. Issuance follows precedents such as Presidential Memorandum (2001), Executive Order 12333, and coordination with congressional committees like the Senate Armed Services Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee when statutory consultation is required.

NSPMs range from classified guidance on operations involving the United States Central Command and United States Indo-Pacific Command to unclassified directives on sanctions coordinated with the Office of Foreign Assets Control and the Department of the Treasury. Types include guidance on intelligence collection authored with the Central Intelligence Agency, directives on cyber operations involving the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and the National Security Agency, and guidance on arms control referencing treaties like the New START Treaty and the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. They can address humanitarian response involving United States Agency for International Development and United States Southern Command, law enforcement cooperation with the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Drug Enforcement Administration, or export control policy touching the Bureau of Industry and Security.

Implementation is executed by principals such as the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State, the Director of National Intelligence, and the head of the United States Agency for International Development, often in collaboration with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Combatant Commands, and agencies like the Federal Emergency Management Agency for domestic implications. Interagency working groups chaired by the National Security Council facilitate tasking, milestones, and budgetary implications coordinated with the Office of Management and Budget and programmatic oversight from congressional appropriations committees like the House Appropriations Committee and the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Notable directives have directed policy shifts relating to counterterrorism with partners such as ISIS targets and coalition partners including United Kingdom, France, and Australia; sanctions strategies addressing Iran and North Korea; and cyber policy responses involving private-sector stakeholders like Microsoft, Google, and Facebook. NSPMs have influenced operations in theaters overseen by United States Central Command and multilateral diplomacy at forums like the United Nations Security Council and G7 Summit. Impact often manifests through altered force posture at bases such as Ramstein Air Base and Camp Humphreys, changes in intelligence priorities at the CIA and NSA, and diplomatic initiatives undertaken by the Secretary of State.

Critiques stem from transparency advocates including ACLU and Human Rights Watch, oversight concerns raised by members of the United States Congress and investigations by committees such as the House Oversight Committee, and legal challenges litigated in courts including the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Debates involve balance between presidential authority and statutory constraints under laws like the War Powers Resolution, secrecy issues involving the Presidential Records Act, and civil liberties questions brought before the Supreme Court of the United States. Critics also cite coordination failures seen in episodes involving the Hurricane Katrina response and intelligence controversies tied to interrogation policies and surveillance programs hinted at in reports by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

Category:United States national security