Last Friday, Florida governor Ron DeSantis presented a detailed national-security strategy in a broad, public foreign-policy speech in Washington, D.C. As is his habit, the presentation was well-organized, logical, and structured around two common themes: that American interests must be prioritized above those of other nations, and that China is the principal threat to those interests now and into the future. The speech went beyond the standard policy statements that have become far too common for modern political candidates. Instead, DeSantis enunciated specific goals that he would pursue as president. There was more than a hint of a brilliant lawyer, which DeSantis is, making his case before a listening judge, the American people, and it had resonance for those who are increasingly paying attention to national security following the Hamas terrorist massacre of some 1,400 Israelis on October 7. This event could turn the coming election from the domestic-policy focus on the economy and immigration that had been in effect to a foreign-policy/commander-in-chief election based on the rising international threat.

“Peace through strength,” which many today ascribe to Ronald Reagan but whose origin stretches back to Rome, emerged as the foundation of DeSantis’s revamped national-security strategy. “America First,” a phrase used by Donald Trump in 2016, and which still resonates within the Republican base, has also become the Florida governor’s touchstone, a clear indication of the power of the MAGA segment of the voting public. For DeSantis, it signals not only his intention to place American interests first and foremost in all his dealings at home and abroad, but also his intention to rebuild the American economy, strengthen America’s position in its own hemisphere, and fortify those parts of its military that will allow the nation to influence the world abroad without our becoming entangled in its vicissitudes, as the previous generation of national leaders did.

While recognizing that this was a national-security speech, the presidential candidate explained how the strength of the American economy serves as the source of American power. Beyond his now-standard line about unleashing America’s domestic-energy production (choosing “the Bakken over Beijing”), DeSantis described the importance of reinvesting in American mining, to include the production of rare earths. Additionally, he highlighted the critical importance of ensuring the nation’s technical leadership in the manufacturing of cutting-edge product lines in robotics, quantum computing, artificial intelligence, and biotech. One could have wished that he had mentioned hypersonic weapons, but four out of five ain’t bad. Additionally, perhaps because he is Florida’s governor and has a better sense of the nation’s interests and relations with Central and South American countries, DeSantis advocated engagement with the nations of the Western Hemisphere economically and diplomatically to win them back to the U.S. side of the growing great-power competition. Such words are music to the ears of national-security experts who have watched Russian, Chinese, and even Iranian investments in the region with growing alarm.

Regarding the U.S. military, the former sailor detailed a specific plan to create a “four-oceans Navy.” It’s a brilliant nod to the Two-Oceans Navy Act that was passed by Congress just prior to World War II, and which was largely credited with setting the nation up for victory in the Pacific. It’s also an acknowledgment on the part of DeSantis that the nation is perilously close to a new global cataclysm. He committed to reaching a 355-ship battle force by the end of his first term and 385 ships by the end of his second, numbers that reveal that he plans to match Reagan’s naval buildup ship for ship. Additionally, DeSantis committed to developing a 20-year shipbuilding plan that would achieve a return to a 600-ship Navy, and thus conventional deterrence at sea against the rapidly growing Chinese threat. It seems clear from DeSantis’s speech that he is seeking a military strategy that will allow the United States to influence other nations without becoming mired in their conflicts with American “boots on the ground.”

The threat from China is the focus of DeSantis’s national-security strategy. China was mentioned in his speech 26 times; Russia and Iran each earned twelve mentions. DeSantis is focused on confronting China in Asia, in the Pacific, and specifically in its threatening posture toward Taiwan. DeSantis asserted that competing against China will be unlike any contest that the United States has pursued in the past because China is a peer economic competitor. DeSantis’s strategy is to economically decouple from the Communist-led authoritarian state, thus weakening it at home, while pressuring it militarily from the outside. In this sense, he’s pursuing the Churchillian grand strategy of “the periphery against the centre.” He is willing both to see the Chinese threat “clearer than truth,” as Secretary of State Dean Acheson said, and to state that threat in stark black-and-white, good-vs.-evil terms. This is a good thing and should be greatly appreciated by the conservative national-security community.

If there was one drawback of the speech, however, it was the candidate’s continued characterization of the security aid to Ukraine as a “blank check” policy, which is clearly red meat for a particular segment of the voting base but has little resemblance to the strategic reality. Still, DeSantis is a long way from where he started on Ukraine, and we all can hope that his position will continue to mature to the point that he will distinctly state the value of confronting Russia now and in eastern Europe.

DeSantis, the only combat veteran in the present field of presidential candidates, a member of the House Foreign Relations Committee for six years, and one of the nation’s most successful governors, demonstrated that he is taking his potential role as commander in chief very seriously. He has built his briefing book and studied it well. To be sure, he needs to add a new page on Russia and Ukraine. But one gets the sense that his interactions with his staff and with the other presidential candidates have suggested larger questions that have illuminated an increasingly complex global security environment. His competitors would be well-served to consider their own foreign-policy plans in similar detail. And voters, first in the Republican primaries and then later in the general election, should demand similarly specific plans for the nation’s strategic future as the race bends from domestic to foreign policy. DeSantis is prepared to lead both at home and abroad, not only strongly but also competently, and it shows.