At War with Ourselves: My Tour of Duty in the Trump White House

by H.R. McMaster

At War with Ourselves has descriptive copy which is not yet available from the Publisher.

Genres: Politics, History, Nonfiction, Memoir, Biography, Audiobook, Presidents

368 pages, Hardcover

First published September 10, 2024

About the author

Herbert Raymond McMaster (born July 24, 1962) is a retired United States Army lieutenant general who served as the 25th United States National Security Advisor from 2017 to 2018. He is also known for his roles in the Gulf War, Operation Enduring Freedom, and Operation Iraqi Freedom.

In February 2017, McMaster succeeded Michael Flynn as President Donald Trump's National Security Advisor. He remained on active duty as a lieutenant general while serving as National Security Advisor, and retired in May 2018. McMaster resigned as National Security Advisor on March 22, 2018, effective April 9,and accepted an academic appointment to Stanford University in 2018.

McMaster is the Fouad and Michelle Ajami Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, the Bernard and Susan Liautaud Visiting Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and a lecturer in management at the Stanford Graduate School of Business.

Reviews

[Michele · Rating 3 out of 5]

I listened to this book on Audible. I have no credentials to say what I'm about to say, but that will not stop me from having a strong opinion. HR McMaster was a disappointment. I thought he was a hard-nosed soldier, but his analytical skills are clearly not what they were cracked up to be when he was appointed and lauded as one of the 'adults in the room' who would restrain Trump. I could give you an example or two from every chapter (divided up into headlines covering a few weeks or months at a go), but I will concentrate on the lessons he did not learn in the early days of his tenure.

McMaster maintains to this moment the idea that Trump was not an aberration as President. He compares Trump to LBJ, and on the surface, there is something in that. LBJ was physically. intimidating and tended to invade personal space. He was forceful, and had a legendary temper. He was coarse. People didn't like him much.

But, there is one glaring difference between Trump and LBJ. When Johnson realized his policies had failed and the country was opposed to his Asian land war, he decided to relinquish his power and let somebody else try to fix it. Trump, after losing re-election by millions of votes, decided to stage an insurrection and to entice swing states to violate the Constitution for him, enlisting the worst right wing militia crazies as the muscle. This is no small thing.

McMaster also misread Mike Flynn's character, and continues to assert that Flynn's only error was going to an FBI interview without a lawyer. McMaster says repeatedly that there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. I guess he didn't read the Mueller report.

IMO, mistakes like these invalidate his credentials, no matter how hard he tried to impose order on the chaos that is Trump. He never caught on to Trump's way of taking all sides of an argument as a means to keep his people quiescent while he advocated the alternative that suited him best in any given moment. He never stopped giving him information he forgot within hours of hearing it. He was always undercut by the Secretaries of State and Defense, who underestimated the readiness of our armed services in order to keep Trump from military adventures in Asia and the Middle East. He didn't catch on when Trump would promise to fix Afghanistan and abandon it at the same time. He was way overmatched at every step and appears unable to see the truth--or to face it. I gave it three stars because it did tell me who McMaster still is despite his close encounter with Trump.

[Nick · Rating 2 out of 5]

McMaster's memoir of his time in the White House suffers the same flaws as Battlegrounds, mainly criticizing, rightly and fairly in many cases, the Obama Administration's flawed approach to national security while failing to recognize the fundamental consistencies of U.S. foreign policy across administrations, which, in part, comes from the the Administrations implementing the laws of Congress with civil servants that remain in place, and the inertia of changing major policies.

With hindsight, McMaster should have recognized that the Trump Administration's national security program failed to dramatically change the interests of adversaries and alter the trajectory of international relations. Despite the Biden Administration's withdrawal from Afghanistan, the resurgence of the Taliban is a greater reflection of the failures of U.S. policy early in the Afghan war, throughout the war, and of the incompetence of the Afghan administration. The U.S. should not remain committed to defending a country that puts itself in a situation to fall absent even the reduced aid the U.S. continued to provide. McMaster, a historian of Vietnam, should have seen the parallels with Vietnamization and the U.S. withdrawal between 1973 and 1975.

In 2024 the national security challenges facing the U.S. are as bad as they have ever been in the post Cold War era. North Korea has nuclear weapons, Israel is at war with Hamas and Hezbollah, China's relative strength continues to increase, and the U.S. commitment to collective security remains an open question amidst toxic domestic politics.

McMaster should have done a better job in At War With Ourselves of recognizing that he was not implementing Trump's national security program, he was implementing his interpretation of Trump's national security program, as was Mattis, Tillerson, and Trump's political-oriented staff, like Kushner and Bannon.

This criticism of At War with Ourselves is not meant to criticize McMaster, who had an impossible task of coordinating and implementing President Trump's National Security Policy, which would still have been nearly impossible in any other Administration. McMaster also rightly criticizes the Obama Administration's bloated National Security Council, micromanagement, and accommodation of adversaries and applies a disciplined mentality to running national security. McMaster's insights into President Trump's Administration offer much powerful insight that highlights how dangerous unstable and disinterested international leadership is when U.S. domestic politics continue past the water's edge, and he should have applied the rightfully critical eye he had of Obama's foreign policy to this problem. It would have been refreshing to have seen McMaster in the Administration of Bush or Obama, and interesting to hear his assessment of progress and challenges.

[M Kelley · Rating 3 out of 5]

Some of the things General McMaster said had me scratching my head. I really don’t believe there were a great deal of similarities between LBJ and Trump. LBJ changed the course of our country. Trump, well… I can believe what he said about Bannon, but Kelly? Well, not so much… I am still heart broken for Otto. This was well written and reminded me a bit of the memoir written by Ben Carson… a lot of self-serving and credit grabbing… for real? I don’t know…

[Bjørn Borud · Rating 2 out of 5]

This was a slightly weird book. Most of the book feels like a tale of a middleschooler who exists at the edge of the cool gang he wants to be part of - but who isn't quite in, but is somehow existing in the same sphere as the cool kids. He spends a lot of the book whining about how the other kids are mean to him, and in his telling he is always trying to do the "right thing". Of all of these political memoirs are like that, so that isn't unique, but it somehow sounds hollow.

I'm not sure if him talking about Trump's ad-hoc style politics as if it were well-reasoned and intentional strategy is McMaster being naive or if he is being obsequious. It doesn't exactly make him sound credible or sincere. Something is clearly off. Especially when it is always mixed with the observations that Trump behaves like a petulant, contrarian child who doesn't want to do his homework and thus always shows up unprepared or that he goes against advice because he is annoyed.

The constant observation without proper analysis and his fear of confronting the subject matter head on makes him seem somewhat spineless. He also seemed afraid of confronting Trump properly and demand he do better. I think his sense of rank and "his place" got in the way of doing the job that needed doing.

It is obvious from the book that McMaster was probably in the wrong job. He seemed to just not get the political game played at that level and I think he was limited by his military background since he can't seem to muster the courage to set aside his military rank and just take up the space he needed to take up to give the job his best. Instead he keeps fretting over how he is belittled, side-tracked, and bullied - probably because he gets confused when there isn't a clear hierarchy and he somehow expects the other players to "play nice".

I read a few other reviews of this book (mostly in the press) and very few of them actually seem to observe these problems with adapting to the situation. One might as well get ChatGPT to write those bland, toothless reviews if reviewers aren't going to address what is painfully obvious. I wasn't going to write this review, but after reading all the twaddle written about this book I thought there needed to be at least one review that was somewhat more critical.

[Dale · Rating 3 out of 5]

An insider’s look at the Trump White House. Not a lot of surprises but it does give some context to how and why Trump approached foreign policy and security matters. The relationship between DOS, DOD, and NSC was very interesting.

[David Cook · Rating 4 out of 5]

BOOK REVIEW - At War with Ourselves: My Tour of Duty in the Trump White House (03.25.25)

H.R. McMasterGeneral McMaster delivers a powerful and timely analysis of America’s strategic failures and internal divisions. Drawing on decades of experience as a soldier, scholar, and statesman, McMaster brings unparalleled authority to his critique of U.S. foreign policy, political dysfunction, and leadership. With combat experience in the Gulf War, Iraq, and Afghanistan, a Ph.D. in history from the University of North Carolina, and service as National Security Advisor under President Donald Trump, McMaster is uniquely positioned to diagnose the national malaise he sees eroding American strength.

The book is both a warning and a call to action. McMaster contends that the United States is at risk not simply because of external adversaries, but because of its own unwillingness to confront hard truths and maintain strategic discipline. He writes, “We are at war with ourselves—not just in the figurative sense of bitter partisanship and political division, but in how we choose to ignore the responsibilities that come with leadership in the free world.” That introspection is what gives the book its enduring relevance.

While McMaster criticizes multiple administrations for their strategic missteps, he is particularly damning, albeit measured, in his assessment of Donald Trump. Rather than resort to polemic, McMaster presents Trump as emblematic of a deeper crisis in American leadership: one defined by impulsivity, personal ego, and disdain for institutions. His tenure in the Trump administration lends credibility to his critique, as he witnessed firsthand a president who undermined alliances, scorned expert advice, and preferred autocratic flattery to democratic partnership.

McMaster’s discomfort with Trump is evident, though always framed within a broader plea for institutional renewal and principled leadership. His military and academic background shines through as he blends historical parallels with contemporary challenges, urging readers to resist complacency and polarization. The result is a serious work from a serious man—one who has not only studied history but shaped it.

At War With Ourselves is not a partisan screed but a patriotic appeal. McMaster calls on Americans to rediscover civic responsibility, moral courage, and strategic clarity. For anyone concerned about the future of American democracy and global leadership, this book is not just a diagnosis—it is a roadmap for repair.

[Chad Manske · Rating 5 out of 5]

H.R. McMaster's "At War with Ourselves: My Tour of Duty in the Trump White House" provides a riveting account of his time as National Security Advisor under President Donald Trump. The book offers readers a unique, insider perspective on the inner workings of the White House during a particularly tumultuous period in American politics. McMaster, a retired three-star general, brings a disciplined and analytical approach to his narrative, blending personal anecdotes with broader geopolitical analysis. His military background infuses the text with a sense of duty and patriotism, even as he navigates the often chaotic and unpredictable environment of the Trump administration. He does not shy away from discussing the challenges and frustrations he faced, particularly in dealing with a president known for his unconventional style and reluctance to adhere to established protocols. Yet, McMaster's tone remains respectful and professional, avoiding sensationalism or personal attacks. The book is divided into thematic sections, each addressing key issues such as national security strategy, foreign policy, and internal White House dynamics. McMaster provides detailed accounts of critical events, such as the handling of North Korea's nuclear threat, the response to Syrian chemical attacks, and the complex relationship with Russia. His insights are both enlightening and thought-provoking, offering readers a clearer understanding of the complexities involved in national security decision-making. What sets "At War with Ourselves" apart is McMaster's ability to contextualize his experiences within a broader historical and strategic framework. He draws on his extensive knowledge of military history to explain the rationale behind various decisions and to critique the administration's approach to global challenges. This makes the book not only a memoir but also a valuable resource for anyone interested in national security and foreign policy. In summary, "At War with Ourselves: My Tour of Duty in the Trump White House" is a highly informative and engaging read. McMaster's balanced and nuanced perspective provides a rare glimpse into the intricacies of governance and the complexities of serving in a high-stakes, high-pressure role. Whether you are a political enthusiast or a casual reader, this book offers both entertainment and enlightenment.

[Paul · Rating 5 out of 5]

Another outstanding book by McMaster. I hope he has time to write many more! I was drawn to his narrative of his year serving the President as his National Security Advisor as I have been to some of the places the author discussed, and have wondered about the President’s personality and mannerisms. McMaster certainly helped me better understand what is going on in DC during the second term. So many key points, but the best are below.

-Beyond the fundamental incompatibility of our personalities, “the three A's”, allies, authoritarians, and Afghanistan, became millstones that ground down my relationship with trump. P11.
-I had learned from that research and from my wartime experience that policies developed in Washington are often written by those who do not understand what it takes to implement them. P22. PJK: Implementation plans are critical to the success of any idea/policy.
-Over the next year, I would routinely visit directors in their offices. Gave me the opportunity to see members of the NSC staff more frequently, hear their perspectives, and benefit from their insights. Meeting people on their own turf often makes them feel more comfortable. P34. PJK: I did this as a BN CDR. Visits subordinate leaders in their offices; you see what’s important to them and they are more comfortable.
-… The Bush administration in its waning months had initiated massive programs and investments to help establish a functioning state…. Efforts to build state institutions were erratic and ill conceived. Advisors prodded Afghans to establish centralized national level systems incompatible with their traditionally decentralized form of governance. P109. PJK: Saw this in 2015. So much money was still pouring into Afghanistan to build up these institutions… but we knew it wasn’t going to work.
-…. The contrast between the trappings of power in the prime minister's office and the actual powerlessness of that office was striking… army headquarters remained the center of power…. The reality that while most countries have an army, pakistan's army has a country. P120.
-…but India is fearful both of entrapment into competitions from which it would prefer to abstain and abandonment based on the short American attention span and ambivalence over South Asia. P122. PJK: Great insight into how India’s actions on the world stage.
-Pence asked Moon, “Why does Kim Jong Un need nukes when he has conventional artillery in range of Seoul? We have to consider the possibility that Kim wants the weapons for offensive purposes.” P174.
-It was another example of an unconventional tweet reinforcing policy. It was all there: maximum pressure, allies, burden sharing, and Beijing's ability to coerce Pyongyang. P182.
-But we were helping trump direct his disruptive nature toward what needed to be disrupted. P190. PJK: Help the boss use his/her talents in the best way possible.
-I was concerned that China was already reverting to form and continuing to use the DPRK and its nuclear and missile programs as a means to maintain its geographical buffer and drive a wedge between the United States and its South Korean and Japanese allies. P204.
-Moreover, I had realized that Trump was not a team builder. He enjoyed and contributed to interpersonal drama in the White House and across the administration. P209. PJK: So true. Trump doesn’t build teams… he breaks them apart. USAID, DoD, etc, etc.
-Time is an important dimension of strategy. P224. PJK: So true. How much time do you have to make a difference?
-Whenever I found my job frustrating, I thought of what it was like to be Trump's chief of staff. P248.
-He wanted a yes man, someone who would tell him more of what I had heard in that first Oval Office meeting in February, that his instincts were always right, combined with various forms of flattery and affirmation. P270. PJK: Great insight into Trump’s personality.
-It was difficult to get State and Defense even to comply with Trump's directives to stop certain activities…. The Pentagon was going to deliver a military aid package that included more than $150 million worth of armored vehicles… We had all heard Trump say, "I do not want any money going to Pakistan.” P281. PJK: Crazy. Seems like a Presidential directive must be followed (assuming its legal of course). Makes me better understand why Trump hired weaklings in his second term.
-I had done my best to show Trump that the United States’ leaving the Middle East would neither conciliate the regions violent passions nor insulate America from them. P285.
-… Some of President Biden's foreign policy storms gathered in an atmosphere of inconsistency that trump had created before he left office. P330.
-Trump lacked basic knowledge of how the government runs, and his impatience with learning about the rules of his officials and about alternative models for decision making limited his ability to lead. P333. PJK: Brilliant assessment.. and very true in 2025 as Trump and the deputy president (Musk) break apart the federal government’s organizations. No wonder it’s being executed so poorly. They are clueless, and they have not thought out their plans.

[Jung · Rating 2 out of 5]

In his book "At War with Ourselves: My Tour of Duty in the Trump White House", H.R. McMaster provides a deeply personal and candid account of his year as National Security Advisor under President Donald Trump. Known for his intellectual rigor and strategic mindset, McMaster entered the administration amid turmoil and high-stakes demands, particularly after the resignation of his predecessor, Michael Flynn. From the outset, his task was to bring stability to the National Security Council (NSC) and advance America’s strategic interests. However, McMaster quickly encountered an environment rife with power struggles, unpredictable decision-making, and the pervasive influence of personalities at odds with his straightforward military values.

After accepting the role, McMaster’s induction began with a hasty trip to Mar-a-Lago for a meeting with Trump, who, impressed by McMaster’s insights on global issues, immediately offered him the position. With minimal preparation time, McMaster launched into his duties at the White House, hoping to instill a disciplined approach to national security decision-making. One of his earliest battles emerged with Steve Bannon, Trump’s Chief Strategist, whose partisan influence over the NSC clashed with McMaster's desire to maintain objectivity. Despite McMaster’s success in having Bannon removed from the NSC, the tensions only served to heighten his adversary's influence behind the scenes.

In his quest for order, McMaster focused on implementing regular, structured meetings at the NSC to counteract the administration’s erratic tendencies. He prioritized a long-term, comprehensive security strategy that moved away from reactive short-term solutions, stressing the importance of diplomacy and foresight over brute force alone. But McMaster soon realized that Trump’s impulsive nature and susceptibility to ego-driven influence made this vision difficult to achieve. Drawing a parallel with former President Lyndon B. Johnson, McMaster noted Trump’s vulnerability to those skilled in manipulating his self-image, particularly Bannon. This ‘witches’ brew’ of influences made it challenging to focus on policies rather than personal conflicts.

To connect with Trump more effectively, McMaster relied on tactical storytelling and visual aids. He frequently presented Trump with impactful visuals that highlighted the human consequences of policy decisions, particularly in Afghanistan, to make the complexities of foreign policy more tangible. For example, contrasting images of Kabul under Taliban rule and its more stable state in 2017 helped Trump better understand the significance of America’s presence in the region. While these tactics occasionally succeeded in grounding Trump’s approach, McMaster found himself constantly countering last-minute changes and erratic policy shifts.

The inner conflicts within Trump’s cabinet added further strain to McMaster’s efforts. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, ideally allies in shaping foreign policy, approached their roles with a sense of ownership that often put them at odds with McMaster. Tillerson, for instance, saw McMaster’s involvement as an encroachment on the State Department’s authority, while Mattis preferred bypassing NSC protocols, believing this would provide him direct influence over the President’s decisions. This lack of coordination within the administration, particularly regarding sensitive issues with countries like Iran and North Korea, limited McMaster’s ability to guide comprehensive strategies.

Compounding his challenges, McMaster also faced public attacks from far-right activists and media figures who branded him as a ‘globalist’ out of step with the Trump administration’s populist agenda. Some accused him of being anti-Israel, and with the support of Russian bots and trolls, the attacks intensified. The pressure of this smear campaign created a climate of isolation and chaos, which, though unsupported by Trump publicly, continued to chip away at McMaster’s influence. This tension escalated to a point where McMaster began receiving threats, adding a new dimension to the already hostile work environment.

As international issues grew more complex, McMaster recognized the critical need for sustained attention on U.S. rivals like Syria and Afghanistan, but the President’s shifting stance made consistent policy implementation nearly impossible. On one occasion, just before a United Nations address, Trump inserted the phrase "Totally Destroy North Korea" into his speech, creating a diplomatic firestorm. Instances like these required McMaster to play the role of damage control, attempting to reframe such statements to align with broader, long-term strategic goals.

The fragmentation within the administration came to a head during McMaster’s preparation for the World Economic Forum in early 2018. Amid mounting rumors of his impending departure, he saw the forum as a chance to articulate a firm U.S. stance, particularly toward China’s growing economic influence. Yet even this crucial moment was marred by distractions and internal conflicts that hindered the presentation of a cohesive foreign policy agenda.

Ultimately, McMaster’s tenure illustrates the profound challenges of navigating the Trump administration’s unique dynamics while maintaining a commitment to national security. Caught between conflicting personalities, reactive policymaking, and an unprecedented level of public scrutiny, McMaster’s year in the White House proved to be an intensely trying experience that underscored the fragility of policy-making in an environment dominated by personal agendas. The book offers a rare look at the clash between military discipline and political improvisation and serves as a powerful reflection on the limitations faced by even the most steadfast public servants when dealing with unpredictable leadership.

[Forrest · Rating 3 out of 5]

Looking back, I was enthused about McMaster's appointment to head  the National  Security Council.  I was surprised once I learned he'd left and was replaced with John Bolton. I only now learned he had published a memoir. 

McMaster narrates the book in a self exculpatory tone,  enthusiastically highlighting his triumphs and defending his actions. 

Among other things,  McMaster discusses his role in offensive maneuvers against Assad's regime following their chemical attacks against civilians,  our relationship with China and its leverage with the Pyongyang,  specifically Trump's relationship with Xi. He discusses the administration's internal discord on strategy in Afghanistan against the Taliban, and advising the president on Korea and Russia, an issue in which he particularly didn't see eye to eye with Trump. He discusses problematic leaks to the media from National Security meetings.

One thing that I agree with McMaster on is the fact that The Trump administration miss the opportunity to "deliver a positive message on legal immigration" during his first two years. This in light of the fact that so many people falsely believe him to be anti-immigrant or racist.

The author seems to single out the legacy media outlets as "legitimate" news sources. This is ironic given how he expounds  on the political divide in America throughout the book which he recognizes is exacerbated by the increasingly partisan and bias media. While he repeatedly points out the falsity of the debunked Russia collusion narrative, he doesn't call out the propogandists by name like he does with some of the conservative hosts and outlets he takes issue with.

McMaster is far more critical of other members of Trump's cabinet than Trump himself and he seems to be at odds with nearly everyone. Throughout the book,  he is particularly critical of Steve Bannon, James Mattis, Reince Priebus, Rex Tillerson, John Kelly,  Trump's predecessor Obama, other unnamed advisors or influencers and Trump's MAGA base.

It seems that McMaster's biggest criticisms of Trump are that, like Obama, seems to have an affinity toward authoritarian leaders,  is often impolite, capricious, and vulnerable to "insecurity" regarding the intel he receives. If this is true, it is perfectly understandable given the media,  Congress,  and even members of his own administration working in concert to sabotage his presidency, undermine him by sharing and promoting false or misleading information,  and leaking cabinet meeting info. 

McMaster seems particularly annoyed by being labeled a "globalist" by outlets he refers to as the right wing media. Yet he does little to distinguish himself from the typical globalist neo-con agenda given his views on trade and NATO, criticizing Trump for demanding more reciprocity from our European allies, and encouraging prolonged military engagement in the Middle East.

McMaster stupidly parrots the lie widely promoted by the leftist media that Trump encouraged "an assault" on the Capitol.   Last I checked,  calling on people to "peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard" is not equivalent to what was portrayed as having happened on January 6th. Furthermore,  everyone who was there had a right to be there and protest given the shady and suspect way in which Biden "won" the 2020 election. 

In the end,  I think McMaster is candid and genuine in this memoir and I think he is honest in most of what he writes here.  Despite what other reviewers say, McMaster is far more complimentary of Trump than critical.  Despite what fake news outlets such as Mother Jones claim, the author at no point ever writes or even suggests that Trump is "unfit" for office.

Trump would no doubt be a demanding and difficult person to work for. (He made that obvious to everyone on "The Apprentice"). Many of his cabinet advisors got burned out and some were even later resentful towards Trump.  But his job isn't to please his advisors,  his donors, or other foreign leaders.  His job is to keep his campaign promises, make America "great", restore freedom and liberty and ensure people have the means to work toward prosperity.  That is what he promised and it is by that standard we will judge him. 

Personally,  I'm optimistic and excited for Trump's next term in office.  I'm also relieved he will bring an end to grift and corruption of the current circus and freak show of the Biden/Harris regime. 

[Dawn · Rating 2 out of 5]

An impulse read for me, fueled by vitriol more than curiosity. But I will say this is a classic Pollyanna narrative. His willfully blind ‘service’ to Trump was only backstopped by an equally colonial zero-sum assessment complex global relationships. The ‘yes sir’ ism was everywhere in the text. But. McMaster is not a dick. He’s not stupid either. He’s arguing for the aggressive simplification of global capitalism as a story of winners and losers, good and bad, or rather good faith and bad faith actors… but…what he never quite grasps is the idea that global capitalism is a stage… and actors are always actors upon it… sooooo… yeah Pollyanna… but also a lesson on pragmatism in this craven new world.

[Bill Manzi · Rating 3 out of 5]

He is no Kissinger.

Where to start with this book? I picked this up with a sense of respect for McMaster based on his rank and just general knowledge of his career. After reading the book that respect has not gone away but is diminished.

In terms of the book itself, and in light of McMaster constantly citing Kissinger, I have to make the comparison to the Kissinger memoirs. Kissinger’s first volume dealt with his tenure as national security adviser to President Nixon, the same position that McMaster held. The difference is stark, with Kissinger offering great detail about policy and tactics and strategy that went into developing that policy. It was well known that Kissinger, during his tenure, had an extremely poor relationship with Secretary of State William Rogers, and a rocky relationship with defense Secretary Mel Laird. Despite that Kissinger did not use his memoirs to even scores. He went out of his way to acknowledge these differences but did not score settle, In fact Kissinger assumed some measure of blame for the poor relationships, and actually expressed regret for some of his actions. In this book McMaster constantly slams Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis. They are the bad guys and he is the policy white knight. McMaster tells us of a Zoom call with Kissinger:

“I told him that around the time of our lunch together in my office, I realized that I faced a fundamental choice of either fighting off those who were engaged in subterfuge with the president and were weaponizing various media against me or ignoring the noise and doing the best job I could. I chose the latter. Kissinger told me in his distinctive German accent, ‘You made the right choice; they would have eaten you alive.’”

H.R. McMaster At War with Ourselves My Tour of Duty in the Trump White House pg. 137

I think McMaster may have missed Kissinger’s essential point there, but I am not surprised.

McMaster left the job after being fired by Trump. It is amazing that he lasted for as long as he did (13 months)and despite being at odds with Trump on so many national security issues he chose to blame those folks that he believes undermined him with Trump. He does not appear to believe that fundamental differences with Trump on NATO, on Russia and Vladimir Putin, on North Korea, Afghanistan, and on the fundamental role in the world to be played by the U.S. contributed to his ouster.
McMaster tries to give us the two-step on the relative merits of the Trump Administration foreign policy while poking big holes in his own position. We get some praise for the effectiveness of the Trump foreign policy, coupled with his belief that Trump was in thrall to Putin. He describes a meeting between Trump and Putin:

“Putin used his time with Trump to launch a sophisticated and sustained campaign to manipulate him. Profilers and psychological operations officers at Russia’s intelligence services must have been working overtime. … Putin got the desired effect from the meeting and the dinner.”

H.R. McMaster At War with Ourselves My Tour of Duty in the Trump White House pg. 188-189

I doubt the Russian profilers had to work overtime. The serious differences between Trump and McMaster on NATO are also highlighted, with some lip service given by McMaster to the need for NATO members to increase their own defense spending. Aside from that the ignorance of how and why NATO was formed, and that the true beneficiary of NATO division or destruction is Russia, is principally ignored. But McMaster does take plenty of time to question why some people are uneasy over the influence in U.S. elections of Vlad Putin. I am not quite sure how McMaster believed he could effectively serve a President with whom he had such major disagreements on fundamental policy.

In areas where McMaster does get into policy it is my view that we were talking small ball. Some tactical victories but nothing that would bring any comparisons to Kissinger. We do get plenty of criticism of Mattis, with Mattis (and Tillerson) taking the hit for the lack of additional achievement.

As a final note on how this guy, in my opinion, got some pretty basic stuff wrong McMaster compares Trump to LBJ.

“I saw in Trump trail similar to those in Lyndon Johnson. As with LBJ, Trump’s insecurities and desire for attention left him perpetually distracted and vulnerable to a mainstream media that was vehemently opposed to him. Also, like LBJ, he had a loose relationship with the truth and a tendency toward hyperbole.”

H.R. McMaster At War with Ourselves My Tour of Duty in the Trump White House pg. 67

Everybody is entitled to their opinion, but this one betrays a rather fundamental lack of understanding. LBJ , like him or not, is arguably the President with the greatest hands on knowledge about how government works in U.S. history. Trump has no real idea about how government works and is not interested in learning. Johnson, even when his policy was wrong, was driving towards his policy goal(s). Johnson was not distracted in the least. He worked around the clock, and when the time came he gave up the levers of power voluntarily. Pretty poor comparison.

Despite my many objections I am glad I read the book and I can say that it is not likely that H.R. McMaster will be working in any administration, Democratic or Republican, in the future.

[Ali Hassan · Rating 4 out of 5]

H.R. McMaster’s At War with Ourselves provides a detailed and insightful examination of his tenure as National Security Advisor in the Trump administration. As a respected military leader and strategist, McMaster approaches his narrative with a sense of duty and professionalism, offering readers a unique lens through which to view the internal dynamics of the White House during a particularly contentious period in American history.

The book sheds light on the struggles McMaster faced in balancing his role as a public servant committed to national security and the often unpredictable nature of President Trump’s decision-making.

McMaster’s writing is precise and analytical, reflecting his background as a military strategist. His critique is not directed solely at Trump, but at broader systemic issues that he perceives in the realm of U.S. foreign policy and governance. This allows the book to transcend a simple political memoir, becoming a thoughtful reflection on leadership, values, and the complexity of policy-making in a deeply polarized environment.

One of the standout features of the memoir is McMaster’s exploration of major foreign policy challenges, such as relations with North Korea, Russia, and Iran. His discussions on these topics are filled with nuanced insights and offer readers a behind-the-scenes look at the strategic dilemmas the U.S. faced. McMaster also delves into the philosophical underpinnings of U.S. foreign policy, critiquing the isolationist tendencies that have surfaced in recent years while advocating for a principled, values-driven approach to international relations.

While McMaster remains diplomatic in his assessment of Trump, he doesn't shy away from discussing the difficulties he encountered in trying to implement a coherent national security strategy. His frustration with the lack of consistency and the chaotic nature of decision-making is palpable, but his tone remains measured and professional throughout. This restraint allows the book to maintain its focus on policy and leadership, rather than becoming a personal attack or a sensationalist tell-all.

At its core, At War with Ourselves is a reflection on the intersection of military professionalism and political reality. McMaster’s commitment to the values of duty, honor, and country shines through in every chapter, and his disillusionment with the way those values were sometimes sidelined in favor of political expediency is a central theme of the book. His reflections on leadership, both in the military and in government, are thought-provoking and offer valuable lessons for current and future leaders.

Ultimately, McMaster’s memoir is a compelling read for those interested in U.S. foreign policy, military strategy, and the complexities of leadership in challenging times. It offers a balanced, insightful account of a period of American history marked by upheaval and division, while also serving as a reminder of the importance of principle and integrity in public service.

[Dave Reads · Rating 4 out of 5]

H. R. McMaster’s At War with Ourselves: My Tour of Duty in the Trump White House shares his observations of his 13 months as national security advisor under President Donald Trump. McMaster begins the book by noting he intended to move political spin and partisan narratives to present his firsthand experiences inside a chaotic and divided White House. At various points during the book, McMaster supports the President’s action while at other times voicing his concerns.

He describes Trump as a leader driven by insecurity, ego, and a constant need for affirmation, often pitting advisors against one another instead of building collaboration. McMaster recalls challenges ranging from internal leaks and political infighting to Trump’s inconsistent foreign policy instincts, shaped by flattery, media influence, and impulsive decisions.

At the same time, McMaster details moments of progress, including efforts to reshape U.S. foreign policy toward China, Russia, North Korea, and the Middle East. He acknowledges both Trump’s disruptive strengths and his weaknesses as a leader who struggled with the structure and discipline of governing.

The book portrays a White House consumed by internal rivalries, polarization, and external pressures, making national security decisions harder than they needed to be. In the end, McMaster reflects that while the administration achieved some meaningful policy shifts, Trump’s flaws in judgment and leadership ultimately undermined both his presidency and America’s standing, culminating in the tragedy of January 6, 2021.


What I Learned From The Book
• The Trump White House was plagued by chaos, leaks, and constant infighting.
• Trump thrived on personal loyalty and flattery, often distrusting or discarding advisors who challenged him.
• Many aides competed for influence instead of working as a team, weakening decision-making.
• Trump’s insecurities made him vulnerable to manipulation by both allies and adversaries.
• Putin and other foreign leaders exploited Trump’s ego to advance their agendas.
• Polarization and partisanship inside the U.S. weakened governance and national security.
• Trump undervalued alliances, particularly NATO, and often treated partners with suspicion.
• National security policies were often undermined by staff rivalries and political agendas.
• McMaster tried to build disciplined foreign policy strategies, but progress was constantly disrupted.
• Trump’s impulsiveness and preference for dramatic gestures over strategy limited effectiveness.
• His communication style—direct, emotional, and often coarse—contrasted with past presidents like Reagan.
• The Afghanistan war exposed flaws similar to Vietnam, with unclear goals and poor policy design.
• Trump wanted quick exits from conflicts like Afghanistan, dismissing long-term risks.
• Despite dysfunction, the administration made some meaningful shifts in policy toward China, Russia, Iran, and the Middle East.
• Trump’s inability to accept the 2020 election results and his ego-driven decisions led to the tragedy of January 6, 2021.

[Martin · Rating 3 out of 5]

As a rule I don't believe I should write reviews of books I did not finish. But last week's unbelievable re-election of a convicted felon/sexual abuser/grifter/conman forced me to reconsider reading the remainder of this memoir about Trump's first term when I'm going to have to live through the next four years (or perhaps fewer if his cognitive decline increases.) Forgive me for getting political, but, emotionally, I could not entertain continuing to read this. That being said, let me share my initial impressions (I completed I think at least 50-60% of the book.) While McMaster's writing is easy and conversational, it always appeared to me to be self-serving (I guess many memoirs are) and he often likes to take credit for what I perceived of as highly questionable "wins" (When Trump emerges from a meeting with a foreign leader, say, and refrains from outright insults or implementing WWIII McMaster chalks that up to a success.) He portrays himself as guided by principle and his colleagues in the Cabinet, particularly Tillerson (at State) and Mattis (Defense) as obstructionists pursuing their own agendas. He shares a few interesting insights, but nothing all that new to anyone who has observed Trump's childish demeanor, short attention span or lack of intellectual curiosity. Protect your emotional well-being and skip this memoir until Trump is a distant historical memory (if that ever happens.) For now, we have to protect our nation and our neighbors. I'm going back to Fiction. It's less scary.

[Tyson Wetzel · Rating 3 out of 5]

General McMaster attempted to provide an even-handed look at his time in the Trump administration. He definitely didn’t slam the former President, though I did think his editorializing on things like the Russian investigation actually ran pretty pro-Trump. My issue with the book is not that he was overly pro- or anti-Trump, it’s that he was so damn arrogant. During the entire book he only admitted to one minor mistake, not getting Secretaries Mattis and Tillerson to be more cooperative, which actually is more of an indictment of them. If you listen to McMaster, he had the correct answer on literally every foreign policy topic that impacted the Trump administration. According to him, Obama screwed everything up, he got Trump to fix it during his 14-months on the job, then Trump screwed it up again after McMaster was fired and then Biden exacerbated the screw ups. I got real tired of reading about how brilliant his strategies were and how dumb or unhelpful everyone else but him was. No need to read this one, skip it

[Pat Herndon · Rating 4 out of 5]

Kudos for his candor. I believe that McMaster is intelligent, has good intentions and is deeply earnest. However, his loyalty to the office of President seemed to cause him to credit Trump with a wisdom that no one will convince me actually exists. He describes the EXACT behaviors by Trump described by “the left wing media,” while refusing to acknowledge these as disqualifying character flaws. He tut-tuts many of Trump’s inclinations while giving him credit every time Trump followed through with McMaster’s recommendations. McMaster never veils his contempt for Obama’s foreign policies. He acknowledges Trump’s flaws, acknowledges the impediments of a bureaucratic government but cuts Trump so much grace that I left this book so confused. When I think of people with whom I’d love to have a nice dinner and candid conversation, McMaster is now VERY high on my list.
This book is definitely worth reading and will provide future historians with some good primary source data.

[Fred Klein · Rating 4 out of 5]

McMaster provides an interesting and fair review of his time as Trump's national security advisor. He criticizes Trump, but this is not a Trump-bashing book.

I don't agree with everything McMaster says, especially when he refers to the "lies" about Russian collusion; that is not consistent with the Mueller Report. But I have to give credit where credit is due: In the very beginning of the book, McMaster invites skepticism of what he writes: "As a historian, I have been a consumer of books like this one, and I have always approached them with vigilance and skepticism. I expect that you will do the same."

With such an approach of forthrightness and humility, I think that this book merits four stars.

[Drtaxsacto · Rating 5 out of 5]

The job of a National Security Advisor is not the simplest in the world. That problem was multiplied in the first Trump Administration. General McMaster took over in the role after Trump’s first advisor was ambushed by a trio of Obama officials.

This book, I think does an honest assessment of his time in the role. He details the real accomplishments that the President accomplished - which the democrats who suffer from TDS would never admit. But he also details key issues where having a boss who has a personal focus on everything can make the job impossible.

As a rule I don’t like these kinds of memoirs but what sets this one apart is his candid assessment of both the job and the boss. MAGA people won’t like the book because it points out the flaws in 45. Dems won’t like it because it shows the real skills that Trump brought to his first term.

[Braden · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting.
Insightful.

The books opens with this:

“Those who despise Donald Trump will want to read in these pages confirmation that he was a narcissist unfit for the highest office in the land. Those who revere him will want to read how Trump the anti-hero fought to save the United States from establishment politicians and bureaucrats who had for too long been derelict in their duty to the American people.
But I wrote this book to get past the hyper-partisanship and explain what really happened. I wrote with no political agenda; the politics of our day are pulling this coun try apart. And I wrote with no desire for requital. I wrote to recount what I experienced.
As a historian, I have been a consumer of books like this one, and I have always approached them with vigilance and skepti-cism. I expect that you will do the same.”

[Scott Wise · Rating 4 out of 5]

Seems to really be written by a historian who understands that his role in history will go down as an unmitigated disaster and is trying to do preemptive damage control of how he will be viewed in it. However, at the same time, he is trying to save face with the underlying base he still feels a part of. This seems to manifest mostly in trying to weed out those that can be the scapegoats in the dysfunction without implicating his peers. This narrative frame seems to point as much to the administration-s underlying issues as does any of the historical details he presents.

[Eleanor Eck · Rating 4 out of 5]

I thought this was a great book for me to understand perspectives outside of my own echo chamber. I enjoyed McMaster’s historical and military perspectives regarding internal analysis of his time working within the Trump administration. I thought his detailing of how Trump let his ego, masculinity, anxiety, short term thinking, and paranoia affect his policy decisions while also explaining his vulnerability to manipulation from actors such as Bannon and Putin. In the end, I’m rating this book a 4/5 because McMaster’s message of diligently aspiring to serve the country and the Constitution - regardless of divisive politics - is a value I would like to see more Americans possess. Like he said, focusing on political polarization is what Putin and other bad actors want out of American politics. However, like many memoirs I’ve read regarding working in Trump’s first term, I wonder how much has changed with this second term.

[Cameron Rhoads · Rating 4 out of 5]

12.5 hours on Audible. A fascinating account by a military advisor to Donald J. Trump.

[Leon Atterberry · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was ok. I was expecting more inside and information but, because he’s a military man, I didn’t get it. I shouldn’t be surprised but I am.

[Kenny Schwarz · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting look at the Trump White House from his second (of four) National Security Advisor, and a great man.. For the most part the book from the no-nonsense McMaster, is fair when pointing out Trump successes and simultaneously identifying the White House dysfunction (particularly the dangers of having too many generals, of various ranks in civil policy positions). His closing comments of Trump’s true nature of hypersensitivity ultimately hindering his succcess and “making him the antagonist of his own story” certainly seems to ring true, even today.

As far as the rest of the book While McMaster is quick to blame others in the cabinet, McMaster never seems to accept any fault other than “I tried to get X person to see reason, and I wasn’t successful” etc. Given that McMaster seemed to engender friction from many quarters, it’s clear many may not view his personal actions through the same rose colored lens. Perhaps more introspection could add greater value to this account, but on the whole, this was a good book.

[Emmet Sullivan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Enjoyable, if a bit boring at times. McMaster is a good writer, but these stories are mostly stale and have largely been told elsewhere by now. Nonetheless, he seems like a truly principled guy and this memoir begs a lot of questions about how a second Trump cabinet is going to shake out.

[Michael Lynch · Rating 5 out of 5]

HR McMaster is one of the few chroniclers of the Trump White House who makes an effort to give a fairly balanced view of that administration. He is no sycophant, and clearly saw all of Trump's flaws but did his best to work with him. His approach reflected exactly what those of us who knew or knew of him expected: he was a thorough professional, serving the nation as best he could under challenging circumstances. If I could identify one flaw in the narrative, it would be his repeated use of the phrase "serving the president." In these hyperpartisan times, that phrase falls particularly harshly on the ears. His official title as Assistant to the President for National Security, demands and implies a certain amount of personal loyalty, but I also know that a professional officer's first loyalty and duty is to the Constitution. Critics may see this as McMaster having "drunk the Kool-Aid" and become Trump apologist, but I choose not to believe that. I think that McMaster went to work every day to serve the country and execute the boss's intent to the extent possible. While McMaster makes thoughts on other administrations clear, I believe that if he had had the same position working for President Obama, he would have approached the task, just as professionally as he did with Trump.
I was disappointed to learn even more about the conflicts with Defense Secretary James Mattis and Chief of Staff John Kelly, but it was not surprising after having read McMaster's previous book, Battlegrounds. I continue to believe that these were three highly professional men doing their best under extremely trying circumstances, and it is unfortunate for the government and the country that all of them eventually left government service. Perhaps Mattis was correct when he advised McMaster to retire... They would perhaps have been on a more even playing field. That said, the 4 star 3 star power imbalance would have remained. McMaster is somewhat disingenuous when he recounts his view of what Mattis and Kelly were trying to do: He accused them of being guardrails, what many of us referred to as the "adults in the room," to keep Trump from doing even greater damage. I found this disingenuous, because he was trying to do the same thing...do the right thing for the country while preventing Trump from messing it up. Whether or not McMaster saw himself as one of those guardrails preventing Trump from driving us over the cliff, those of us who saw what was going on certainly did... and were glad he was there to do so.
Many of the people who served in the first Trump administration deserve our respect for doing the best they could while working for an ignorant, petulant, immature bully whose first and only loyalty was to himself.
As a fellow historian, retired Army officer, and year group contemporary of HR McMaster (full disclosure: I met him a couple of times and we have some friends in common, but we do not know each other well), i admire his professionalism both in how he conducted himself in office and now he has recounted that time. I was pleased to see several references to his first book, Dereliction of Duty, and I saw that his motives in the White House were definitely informed by that previous research. Surely when he was doing the research for that book a couple of decades ago he had no idea where he would end up... And he must have reflected on that many times.

[Sarah Ewald · Rating 3 out of 5]

Another one of those sad books that tell the disarray that existed in the Trump White House. I guess we are in for more of the same, although the people where were there before worked to curb his worst impulses and keep his actions somewhat legal will no longer be there.

The phrase 'too many cooks in the kitchen' comes to mind, as staff often sabotaged the efforts of others...even when the issue was national security.

HR started the book talking about the end of his time in the administration, saying "With Donald Trump, most everybody gets used up, and my time had come." It came at a time when Trump was getting more 'advice' from the commentators on Fox News than from those seasoned professionals who worked for him...

"The president pointed to a stack of newspapers on the right side of his desk. 'General, I have never seen anyone get such good press. Mike (Pompeo), even you didn't get such good press.' Trump looked at me. 'Did you know that Mike graduated number one in his class at west Point?'
I responded, 'No, I did not.. That is impressive. You should know that I, too, graduated near the top of my class, but in a different category--demerits.'
While cracking the West Point joke, I was also counting heads. I could not imagine that having so many people in the Oval Office for an intel briefing would be effective--and it was not. With a large audience, the president seemed to revert to his role as host of The Apprentice, the reality TV show in which Trump was the center of attention as candidates vied for the privilege of serving as his apprentice.
I came to regard the PDB and other meetings in the early days of the Trump White House as exercises in competitive sycophancy."

"I had begun to see Trump as akin to Shakespeare's Othello: his insecurity made him susceptible to manipulation. That play's antagonist, Iago, 'poisons Othello's ear,' and Trump's insecurities, magnified against the backdrop of the Mueller investigation and the hostility of most of the media, made him an easy mark for the many Iago figures around him. Bannon, Priebus, and others employed the same principal tactic as Iago--impugn competitors with accusations of disloyalty or contradicting Trump. As with Othello, Trump's insecurity made him vulnerable to tragic results."

"Trump's longing for affirmation from his base sometimes sabotaged his wish to advance US interests. But when that longing was aligned with important correctives to unwise policies, his energy and his distain for convention could be both powerful and positive. I wanted to help him align his urges with the development of sound policy and purposeful engagements with foreign leaders."

HR saw Trump's management style impede progress in governing.
"Moreover, I had realized that Trump was not a team builder. He enjoyed and contributed to interpersonal drama in the White House and across the administration."

The book gets into the many details of overseas trips and the ceremonies in his honor that these trips entailed. Most of the foreign leaders, by the time he left, realized that flattery was the only way to deal with Trump.

[Greg Kopstein · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is my 25 (!) book on the Trump administration (first term). I have a certain deference towards the military and those who serve, so please forgive some bias in this review. I knew about HR McMaster from the news but also as a “character” in Trump and His Generals, Holding the Line, and other prior books. So he was not a mystery to me, especially after 24 prior books where he was involved or, at the least, in the periphery.

So I think I knew a lot of context the average person may not, or may have missed if you take his book at his word. Let’s cover the pro’s first. He is very balanced and non-partisan, which is refreshing. He sees things not as party-line but rather what’s best for the country (from his lens). He was a firsthand influence or observer in much of the first year of the presidency, so he is a reliable source, especially as much of it is documented in the news or corroborated by other books.

HOWEVER, he is very much in the mindset of: “It wasn’t me. I did what I could. It was… (Trump, Mattis, Tillerson, etc.)” He passes the blame a lot. Not saying that events were or are his fault, but he’s quick to blame others. You need to read their works to get the full picture. He was an active 3-star general, Mattis was a 4-star before retirement and subsequent Secretary of Defense. If you read Snodgrass’ book - and he was with Mattis daily - it’s described that a 3* does not have the same outlook or theater driven mindset as a 4*. So when Mattis excluded or talked down to him, it was from that position. They were not equals. Had McMaster retired, maybe more so, but that wasn’t the case. There’s more to it, but you really need to read other books to understand why they treated McMaster that way. Other books called him out for being pompous or too academic or close minded. Perhaps he wasn’t invited to lunches or meetings, not because they were being exclusive, but because he was not well-liked or thought competent. I’M NOT SAYING THAT, those others books allude to it. Who is to say what is true or not? Like I said, I hold respect for the armed forces too much to create judgments like that.

The point is, this cannot be your only book on the subject. And, sadly, it’s several years too late for a post-mortem. On to the next term, and whatever that may bring. Either way, on to #26 soon, I’m sure.


I have obviously missed or overlooked some books and others I tried and didn’t like - The Trump Tapes by Woodward was just difficult to listen to. But here is my Bibliography, in reverse chronological order.

I’ll Take Your Questions Now, Grisham
Thank You For Your Servitude, Leibovich
Betrayal, Karl
Frankly We Did Win This Election, Bender
Landslide, Wolff
I Alone Can Fix It, Leonig
A Very Stable Genius, Rucker
Hoax, Stelter
The Room Where it Happened, Bolton
Front Row at the Trump Show, Karl
The Art of Her Deal, Jordan
The Grifter’s Club, Blaskey
Trump and His Generals, Bergen
Holding the Line, Snodgrass
United States of Trump, O’Reilly
Team of Vipers, Sims
Commander in Cheat, Reilly
The Russian Hoax, Jarrett
Has Anyone Seen the President?, Lewis
A Higher Loyalty, Comey
Fire and Fury, Wolff
Art of the Deal, Trump
Hacks, Brazile

[Baxter Hodge · Rating 5 out of 5]

Tremendous memoir by LTG (Ret) HR McMaster about his tenure as the National Security Advisor during the first half of President Trump’s first term. President Trump is a polarizing figure to say the least and this commentary about the administration is sure to infuriate partisans on both sides of the political aisle - a fact that provides me great confidence that the author achieved his goal of being “an honest broker”.

The author argues that although President Trump’s disruptive and contrarian nature provided a great opportunity to forge a strong and pragmatic national security posture, the President’s character flaws undermined his ability to build a functional administration and follow through on policy decisions. Despite the President’s desire to exude strength and stand-up for the United States against adversaries and bad-faith “partners”, his lack of discipline, insecurity, and emotionally driven short-sightedness inhibited his ability execute his own national defense strategy. Equally importantly, the President’s character flaws created a dysfunctional administration with some close advisors (namely Steve Bannon) who used the President’s character flaws to incite chaos to increase their own influence and others (named Secretary of Defense Mattie and Secretary of State Tillerson) who largely ignored the President’s decisions and refused to cooperate towards a unified national security strategy.

The most serious counterargument that I believe is worth considering is that perhaps the author felt the administration was dysfunctional precisely because President Trump did not see a need for a National Security Advisor/Council. The author saw his role (defined by statute) as to developing and managing a unified “national security strategy” that would synchronize efforts of the DoD, DoS, DHS, Treasury, DOJ, etc. As far as President Trump seemed to abhor the established dogmas of the diplomatic and defense communities, it is worth considering that the NSC is an unnecessary bureaucratic layer that separates POTUS from his diplomates and military advisors instead of synchronizing the two. President Trump’s recent appointment of Secretary Rubio as the National Security Advisor leads credibility to this argument.

Although it’s a memoir, anyone that is deeply interested in the topic should also read “Dereliction of Duty” which HR McMaster wrote about the LBJ administration’s dysfunctional execution of the Vietnam War. This historic study clearly impacted McMaster’s understanding of his role as national security advisor and should be considered a prequel book to this memoir.