X Close

The myth of America’s imperial decline China and Russia have formed a barbarian alliance

Standing up to the barbarians. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

Standing up to the barbarians. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images)


March 31, 2023   5 mins

With a New World Order lurking on the horizon, will America play nothing more than a supporting role? That is certainly the impression given by recent reports in the US and beyond. While the Ukraine crisis has helped to renew purpose among many nations in the West, the Global South, we’re told, recognises that the post-Cold War era is finished. The international system is fragmenting into “a multipolar world”, and the age of US dominance “may be coming to an end”.

Amplifying this view is the emergence of a renewed Sino-Russian axis, which, according to Vladimir Putin himself, has “consistently worked to create an equitable, open and inclusive regional and global security system”. China’s CCP-controlled Global Times is equally optimistic, suggesting that the Russia-Ukraine conflict serves “as a catalyst for the burial of American hegemony”. A recent University of Cambridge study seemed to confirm this: it found that, for the first time, developing countries are now more supportive of Russia and China than the US.

Yet while America’s unipolarity is undoubtedly fragile, we should be cautious about what this means — particularly when interpreting the motivations of states in the Global South, the symptoms of American decline, and the fragmentary potential of the new Sino-Russian relationship. Most obviously, states in the Global South are not some homogeneous non-Western “Other”, but a collection of different countries with competing interests. The historian Timothy Garton Ash recently argued that the West urgently needs a “new narrative persuasive to countries like India”. This may seem like a harmless observation to make, but it confuses soft power’s capacity to woo a diverse range of self-interested nation states: what is persuasive to India isn’t necessarily persuasive to Indonesia.

Rather than acting as a unified bloc, it is far more likely that states will play sides off against each other, especially as the division between the West and a China-centred global economy gathers pace. Indeed, their capacity to withhold support is a rational strategy to enhance their bargaining power and to win concessions from the West. It is a form of enticement, not indictment. In India, for example, record imports of Russian oil have boosted Narendra Modi’s position with key actors, such as the European Union, which has rapidly accelerated its free-trade negotiations with Delhi. This follows the rapid conclusion of a major semiconductor supply chain and innovation partnership with the US, which will be followed this summer with a visit by Modi, designed to shore up the two countries’ defence and economic links.

Meanwhile, those who posit the decline of America, and by extension the liberal world order, often get key metrics wrong. For instance, it has been argued that as the unipolar moment fades, so will the dollar’s international reserve currency status. Writing in UnHerd, Thomas Fazi recently argued that Western sanctions on Russia have “enhanced the yuan’s reserve currency status”, while Bloomberg reported that the dollar has reached a “critical inflection point”. Even the IMF has signalled alarm.

However, the use of the dollar is based as much on geopolitics as it is on economics. Foreign investors will continue to use the currency not just because of its incredible liquidity as a store of value and medium of global exchange, but because of the US’s legal and governance infrastructure. It remains, after all, the currency of choice in foreign-exchange swap transactions, accounting for nearly half of the $6.6 trillion daily foreign-exchange turnover. Of allocated foreign-exchange reserves in late 2022, the dollar accounted for 60% of the world’s total. The Euro, by contrast, stood at 20%. The Chinese Renminbi? 3%.

The case for a renewed Sino-Russian axis is equally unfounded. Although Putin recently hosted his “dear friend” Xi at the Kremlin, underlying this friendship is the stark reality of a deepening Russian vassalage to Xi’s China. A loss of Russian prestige and status in Ukraine, and by extension an American victory, would prove a mortal blow to Putin’s project of contesting the world order that, from the Kremlin’s perspective, represents a greater civilisational struggle. Given this existential framing, Putin has little choice but to deepen his reliance on China as a market for Russian commodities and supplies for his war machine (via useful proxies such as North Korea).

Moreover, simmering tensions within the Sino-Russian axis already exist. The Siberian Pacific seaboard, which includes regions such as the Russian Far East and the Amur river basin, is rich in natural resources, such as timber, minerals and fisheries. China’s infrastructure and development projects in the region, including through its Belt and Road Initiative, have been primarily economic. As Moscow’s dependency grows, China may seek to salami-slice Russian interests, including the eventual reabsorption of the Pacific Seaboard. And this could lead to a weakening of the Federation as a whole, as well as its disintegration in the long term. None of the Central Asian states have supported the invasion of Ukraine, and are increasingly distancing themselves from Putin’s integration projects. As such, despite proclamations of brotherly love, the chaotic Sino-Russian axis remains unlikely to become a “soft power” pole around which much of the Global South will seek to organise.

The US, meanwhile, retains an incredible capacity to leverage its military power into structuring the international preferences of politically equal but security subordinate states. The threat posed by the emergent Sino-Russian axis increases its capacity to corral powers as diverse as Sweden, Finland, Taiwan and Japan under its strategic superintendence, all of whom look to the US for protection. Underlined by its newly energised Aukus deal, and growing role within Nato, America’s status in major centres of world power remains as strong as it did in the early post-Cold War period.

Zbigniew Brzezinski’s masterful dissection of world politics, The Grand Chessboard (1997), recognised that Eurasia has long been the centre of world power. As a consequence, he identified that “the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among [Eurasian] vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together”. The “most dangerous scenario”, Brzezinski argued, “would be a grand coalition of China, Russia, and perhaps Iran, an ‘antihegemonic’ coalition united not by ideology but by complementary grievances”.

How can a US-led West keep the “barbarians” from coming together? By 1943, the US State Department had recognised that Nazi Germany could not win the global struggle for mastery, so it planned the kind of world order it wanted, which included incorporating a defeated Germany within a new, American-led global order. As the Ukraine crisis rumbles on, the West’s programme is clear, with the nascent expansion of Nato along Russia’s borders and the likely emergence of Ukraine as a fearsome buffer state. Under this strategy, in 10 years, Poland will become the preeminent land power in Europe.

What “carrots” can it leverage? While history never repeats itself, it often rhymes. As in 1943, it is clear that Putin cannot win the Ukraine war. With this in mind, it is not inconceivable that a post-Putin European security order could seek to re-incorporate Russia into a new security and economy architecture. This new “grand bargain” would seek to settle the intersection of historical grievances and fears over status and security. Through institutional reform and transformation, it would attempt to entice a post-Putin Russia into its orbit. Doing so would settle many grand strategic dilemmas driving post-Cold War Nato expansion and Russian hostility. This new post-Putin security order would be right on Beijing’s doorstep, across the 2,615 miles between China and Russia.

In a tripolar world, with America, Russia and China operating as individual actors, any alliance between two great powers inevitably spells doom for the third. And by wedging apart the developing Sino-Russian coalition, America would also be free to “buck-pass” its superintendence to regional European powers, allowing it to finally move more decisively in its long desired “strategic pivot” to East Asia. The popular narrative of America’s secular decline therefore seems overblown. The US enjoys the Pacific and Atlantic moats, and regional hegemony in the Americas. China and Russia, on the other hand, live in a much rougher neighbourhood, and there’s no reason to think their axis could not be wedged apart. Whether that takes a year or a decade, it seems more likely that America will still be front and centre, playing its role as a global protagonist.


Doug Stokes is the Director of the Strategy and Security Institute, University of Exeter and a fellow of the Council on GeoStrategy and the Legatum Institute. His new book, Against Decolonisation: The Campus Culture Wars and the Decline of the West, is due in September 2023.

profdws

Join the discussion


Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber


To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

49 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Panagiotis Papanikolaou
Panagiotis Papanikolaou
1 year ago

When will the Americans realise the fallacy of hoping to radically transform societies through democracy, capitalism and prosperity? It seems that any time a writer identifies a problem but can’t provide a clear solution, they turn to this mantra.

It didn’t work in post-Soviet Russia, didn’t work in Iraq & Afghanistan, didn’t work with China when it joined WTO, how can anyone think that this ” “grand bargain” would settle the intersection of historical grievances and fears over status and security”. What supportive evidence is there, apart from wishful thinking.

Chris Wheatley
Chris Wheatley
1 year ago

The problem is that nobody can define ‘democracy’ succesfully. It is immediately open to question of its validity.
The democracy in the US at the moment means that a lot of rich people try to tell a lot of poor people what is good for them. That works for a while. Those richer, middle-class intellectuals develop theories which are obviously correct in their eyes. The theories become mantras and can’t be questioned.
If the poorer, less well-educated people object, they are said to be ‘thick’ or not capable of understanding. The Brexit vote shows this clearly. The middle-class views in London were overwhelmed when real people decided to vote for once.
In the US you have Democracy 1, the Trump version, which means that the poorer people start to vote – democracy means you, yes you. Then you have Democracy 2, the rich do-gooders who want to tell everybody else what to say and think.
Which do you prefer? I know what I think.

xenophon a
xenophon a
1 year ago

Once we’ve eliminated Russia’s leader and put in a puppet government that kneels to Western control everything will be fine!

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

The simple answer is: if they don’t emulate the West, they stay poor and corrupt, run by idiots like Putin and Xi.
Which in turn insures that the US and Europe always stay on top.
Agreed, however, no need to change any nation’s system by force. If they wish to stay that way, fine.
Just don’t try and change states that really do want to emulate the West.

M Lux
M Lux
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

When you say “emulate”, do you mean attack, loot and undermine the rest of the world (once they try to pick up the pieces from the last “civilizing mission”)?
The west didn’t get rich through democracy and capitalism, it got rich by plundering the world for centuries and then justifying that by way of good old racism (back in the day) and “democracy & freedom” nowadays, while using the advantages of having stolen so much of the worlds riches to create a barrier to states who might want to try to join the club of prosperity (with some rare exceptions) – as is often seen with something like the so-called “resource curse”.
The West is certainly still on top and will likely stay there for most of our lifetimes, but everything has an end and I suspect this is the beginning of the American empires decline. Unfortunately for those of us living in Europe, continuously clinging to Americas coattails will likely mean we will be the first to experience the consequences (aside from their Asian vassals perhaps).

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  M Lux

Indeed, the US conquest of Japan, Taiwan and South Korea left them desperately poor, and dependent on the US. Their governing classes are but puppets for the Washington puppet-masters.
If only they were free and independent, like Zimbabwe!

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  M Lux

Indeed, the US conquest of Japan, Taiwan and South Korea left them desperately poor, and dependent on the US. Their governing classes are but puppets for the Washington puppet-masters.
If only they were free and independent, like Zimbabwe!

M Lux
M Lux
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

When you say “emulate”, do you mean attack, loot and undermine the rest of the world (once they try to pick up the pieces from the last “civilizing mission”)?
The west didn’t get rich through democracy and capitalism, it got rich by plundering the world for centuries and then justifying that by way of good old racism (back in the day) and “democracy & freedom” nowadays, while using the advantages of having stolen so much of the worlds riches to create a barrier to states who might want to try to join the club of prosperity (with some rare exceptions) – as is often seen with something like the so-called “resource curse”.
The West is certainly still on top and will likely stay there for most of our lifetimes, but everything has an end and I suspect this is the beginning of the American empires decline. Unfortunately for those of us living in Europe, continuously clinging to Americas coattails will likely mean we will be the first to experience the consequences (aside from their Asian vassals perhaps).

Vassil Chakarov
Vassil Chakarov
1 year ago

Panayiotis, Russia and China didn’t turn democratic precisely because the pressure from the U.S. was soft and inconsistent, and they only got the carrot but never the stick. Very different from Germany and Japan who first suffered defeating blows and only then got wholehearted assistance from the U.S.
Don’t wanna be a bad prophet but it looks like Putin’s Russia won’t stop until it finally suffers a defeating blow. So here we go.

Chris Wheatley
Chris Wheatley
1 year ago

The problem is that nobody can define ‘democracy’ succesfully. It is immediately open to question of its validity.
The democracy in the US at the moment means that a lot of rich people try to tell a lot of poor people what is good for them. That works for a while. Those richer, middle-class intellectuals develop theories which are obviously correct in their eyes. The theories become mantras and can’t be questioned.
If the poorer, less well-educated people object, they are said to be ‘thick’ or not capable of understanding. The Brexit vote shows this clearly. The middle-class views in London were overwhelmed when real people decided to vote for once.
In the US you have Democracy 1, the Trump version, which means that the poorer people start to vote – democracy means you, yes you. Then you have Democracy 2, the rich do-gooders who want to tell everybody else what to say and think.
Which do you prefer? I know what I think.

xenophon a
xenophon a
1 year ago

Once we’ve eliminated Russia’s leader and put in a puppet government that kneels to Western control everything will be fine!

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

The simple answer is: if they don’t emulate the West, they stay poor and corrupt, run by idiots like Putin and Xi.
Which in turn insures that the US and Europe always stay on top.
Agreed, however, no need to change any nation’s system by force. If they wish to stay that way, fine.
Just don’t try and change states that really do want to emulate the West.

Vassil Chakarov
Vassil Chakarov
1 year ago

Panayiotis, Russia and China didn’t turn democratic precisely because the pressure from the U.S. was soft and inconsistent, and they only got the carrot but never the stick. Very different from Germany and Japan who first suffered defeating blows and only then got wholehearted assistance from the U.S.
Don’t wanna be a bad prophet but it looks like Putin’s Russia won’t stop until it finally suffers a defeating blow. So here we go.

Panagiotis Papanikolaou
Panagiotis Papanikolaou
1 year ago

When will the Americans realise the fallacy of hoping to radically transform societies through democracy, capitalism and prosperity? It seems that any time a writer identifies a problem but can’t provide a clear solution, they turn to this mantra.

It didn’t work in post-Soviet Russia, didn’t work in Iraq & Afghanistan, didn’t work with China when it joined WTO, how can anyone think that this ” “grand bargain” would settle the intersection of historical grievances and fears over status and security”. What supportive evidence is there, apart from wishful thinking.

Steve White
Steve White
1 year ago

Translation: If you don’t agree with the author that US global economic and military hegemony are in decline as it’s culture, institutions and political class is in decline, then you’re a Chinese or Russian propagandist.
The fact is that the one thing that is different in regards to the peace in the middle east that is breaking out is that the US has been completely cut out of all of it. There is a sort of global Spring in the air optimism breaking out.
We have one side that uses threats and sanctions to push an anti-human: transhuman, abortion, radical environmentalism onto the world, and if you don’t agree we will make sure that NGOs empower a radical class to take over your country and make you more useful to our agenda. Then on the other side countries get offered respect for their sovereignty, trade and infrastructure. It’s not hard to see how most of the rest of the world isn’t excited to escape the thuggish warlike cult.
Now, you could argue that China and Russia can’t be trusted. You might have some good arguments there, but as of now it appears that the world is being offered something more attractive than the anti-human cult of power that America now pushes. 

Last edited 1 year ago by Steve White
Stephanie Surface
Stephanie Surface
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve White

It will hopefully all end with a new American President. Otherwise the whole West is doomed. Once the US concentrates on becoming energy independent again, puts an end to some of the cultish movements, clean out their corrupt institutions, there might be some hope, that Europe will stop this nonsense too, otherwise Europe will just become a museum for tourists.

Kat L
Kat L
1 year ago

It seems like it happened overnight but in reality it’s developed at a rapid pace since the 60’s. It will take years to undo all the harm. That said, the dems have hijacked the voting procedures in the most important states so it may be that no republican will ever win the White House again.

Andrei Murgescu
Andrei Murgescu
1 year ago
Reply to  Kat L

I would venture and say that the damage started back with at least FDR. That said I trust on one hand the American spirit and on the other hand the sheer arrogance and hysteria of the American left so there still hope.

Andrei Murgescu
Andrei Murgescu
1 year ago
Reply to  Kat L

I would venture and say that the damage started back with at least FDR. That said I trust on one hand the American spirit and on the other hand the sheer arrogance and hysteria of the American left so there still hope.

Kat L
Kat L
1 year ago

It seems like it happened overnight but in reality it’s developed at a rapid pace since the 60’s. It will take years to undo all the harm. That said, the dems have hijacked the voting procedures in the most important states so it may be that no republican will ever win the White House again.

Stephanie Surface
Stephanie Surface
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve White

It will hopefully all end with a new American President. Otherwise the whole West is doomed. Once the US concentrates on becoming energy independent again, puts an end to some of the cultish movements, clean out their corrupt institutions, there might be some hope, that Europe will stop this nonsense too, otherwise Europe will just become a museum for tourists.

Steve White
Steve White
1 year ago

Translation: If you don’t agree with the author that US global economic and military hegemony are in decline as it’s culture, institutions and political class is in decline, then you’re a Chinese or Russian propagandist.
The fact is that the one thing that is different in regards to the peace in the middle east that is breaking out is that the US has been completely cut out of all of it. There is a sort of global Spring in the air optimism breaking out.
We have one side that uses threats and sanctions to push an anti-human: transhuman, abortion, radical environmentalism onto the world, and if you don’t agree we will make sure that NGOs empower a radical class to take over your country and make you more useful to our agenda. Then on the other side countries get offered respect for their sovereignty, trade and infrastructure. It’s not hard to see how most of the rest of the world isn’t excited to escape the thuggish warlike cult.
Now, you could argue that China and Russia can’t be trusted. You might have some good arguments there, but as of now it appears that the world is being offered something more attractive than the anti-human cult of power that America now pushes. 

Last edited 1 year ago by Steve White
Susan Grabston
Susan Grabston
1 year ago

Oh I think the Americans are fairly barbaric in their own right. Kissinger had it right about friendship with Uncle Sam.

Last edited 1 year ago by Susan Grabston
Karen Fleming
Karen Fleming
1 year ago
Reply to  Susan Grabston

Aren’t we all? The whole world. Each country seeks for itself and that is usually not pretty but the little cooperation that is attained must continually be strived for- no matter how “barbaric” we all are.

Karen Fleming
Karen Fleming
1 year ago
Reply to  Susan Grabston

Aren’t we all? The whole world. Each country seeks for itself and that is usually not pretty but the little cooperation that is attained must continually be strived for- no matter how “barbaric” we all are.

Susan Grabston
Susan Grabston
1 year ago

Oh I think the Americans are fairly barbaric in their own right. Kissinger had it right about friendship with Uncle Sam.

Last edited 1 year ago by Susan Grabston
Arthur G
Arthur G
1 year ago

The issue is not the USA vs China and Russia. The issue is can the free nations of the world stand together vs. the emerging authoritarian states. If you take the US, NATO/EU, and our Pacific Allies (Japan, S. Korea, ANZACS, Taiwan, Singapore) we represent 50% of the worlds GDP, 80% of the world’s naval power, and 90% of the actually free nations. If we stand together, Chinese and Russian power looks pathetic, even if the rest of the BRICS throw in with them. Only by dividing the free world can the authoritarians prevail.
The only reason that the EU is not an equal partner with the US is that Europe has be loathe to spend seriously on their military, or anger Russia and China, for economic reasons. Hopefully the Ukraine War has cured this naivete. Japan also seems ready to become the leader of the free world in Asia.
The democracies need to become a three pillared alliance 1) US/Canada, 2) European NATO/EU, 3) Pacific allies. If India has any sense, they’ll join the other democracies of Asia in opposing China. There’s no reason the US needs to be more than one leg of this stool.

xenophon a
xenophon a
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

We aren’t free you clown, we’re under increasingly authoritarian globalist liberalism that despises the real history, culture, traditions and native peoples of the West.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  xenophon a

Unlike Xi and Putin, who really do honour “the real history, culture, traditions and native peoples of the West.”

Last edited 1 year ago by martin logan
Kat L
Kat L
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

They do with their own as it should be. I don’t understand this comment. Do you not realize what is happening?

Kat L
Kat L
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

They do with their own as it should be. I don’t understand this comment. Do you not realize what is happening?

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  xenophon a

Unlike Xi and Putin, who really do honour “the real history, culture, traditions and native peoples of the West.”

Last edited 1 year ago by martin logan
Steve White
Steve White
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

India is not going to go against a BRICS member. BRICS just surpassed the G7 in GDP. Now there is BRICS+ with the UAE, Iran, Egypt, Turkey, Argentina, and others waiting in line to join. Not sure if you noticed but absent the US, the Middle East is breaking out in peace. Syria is being brought in out of the cold. UAE and Iran are quelling the war in Yemen. Egypt and Turkey are normalizing relations again. All of this without the US involved at all, and really against what the US pushes.
Brazil and China are ditching the USD for local currencies, France just bought Chinese LNG without Petrodollars. The USD is losing its reserve currency status, this is happening. The US inflation has been dumped on other nations currencies, and they want out. People don’t want pipelines blown up or made useful for proxy wars.
The US and West have been hollowed out of the manufacturing base because of globalism, and it’s cultures are declining into a monoculture of transhumanism with anti-human ecological policies. You can’t make things without energy. We have premitized, and dehumanized our cultures into a mess. The hyper-financialization policies that drove our silly do-nothing, build-nothing knowledge based businesses and gave us all this GDP value, but that’s going away. Our currencies and financial institutions are in real trouble, and the fact that the US has made most other nations besides its vassals in Europe dislike it has not helped. The thing is that Russia can make stuff, and so can China. The US and Europe can’t even make enough artillary shells for Ukrain to keep up, but Russia can, and has. That’s a problem, and we’ve all basically disarmed ourselves by giving Ukraine so much for a war they could never win.
I think as the Spring and Summer get here, I think we are all going to be shocked as to basically how screwed we are in just about every decision the Biden Administration has forced on the world, in addition to the stupidity and corrupttion of the EU leadership.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve White

That “Russia can make stuff” is a quite curious statement.
It’s been de-industrializing all save its defence industries for 30 years.

Kat L
Kat L
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Perhaps but every other point was spot on.

Kat L
Kat L
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Perhaps but every other point was spot on.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve White

That “Russia can make stuff” is a quite curious statement.
It’s been de-industrializing all save its defence industries for 30 years.

xenophon a
xenophon a
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

We aren’t free you clown, we’re under increasingly authoritarian globalist liberalism that despises the real history, culture, traditions and native peoples of the West.

Steve White
Steve White
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

India is not going to go against a BRICS member. BRICS just surpassed the G7 in GDP. Now there is BRICS+ with the UAE, Iran, Egypt, Turkey, Argentina, and others waiting in line to join. Not sure if you noticed but absent the US, the Middle East is breaking out in peace. Syria is being brought in out of the cold. UAE and Iran are quelling the war in Yemen. Egypt and Turkey are normalizing relations again. All of this without the US involved at all, and really against what the US pushes.
Brazil and China are ditching the USD for local currencies, France just bought Chinese LNG without Petrodollars. The USD is losing its reserve currency status, this is happening. The US inflation has been dumped on other nations currencies, and they want out. People don’t want pipelines blown up or made useful for proxy wars.
The US and West have been hollowed out of the manufacturing base because of globalism, and it’s cultures are declining into a monoculture of transhumanism with anti-human ecological policies. You can’t make things without energy. We have premitized, and dehumanized our cultures into a mess. The hyper-financialization policies that drove our silly do-nothing, build-nothing knowledge based businesses and gave us all this GDP value, but that’s going away. Our currencies and financial institutions are in real trouble, and the fact that the US has made most other nations besides its vassals in Europe dislike it has not helped. The thing is that Russia can make stuff, and so can China. The US and Europe can’t even make enough artillary shells for Ukrain to keep up, but Russia can, and has. That’s a problem, and we’ve all basically disarmed ourselves by giving Ukraine so much for a war they could never win.
I think as the Spring and Summer get here, I think we are all going to be shocked as to basically how screwed we are in just about every decision the Biden Administration has forced on the world, in addition to the stupidity and corrupttion of the EU leadership.

Arthur G
Arthur G
1 year ago

The issue is not the USA vs China and Russia. The issue is can the free nations of the world stand together vs. the emerging authoritarian states. If you take the US, NATO/EU, and our Pacific Allies (Japan, S. Korea, ANZACS, Taiwan, Singapore) we represent 50% of the worlds GDP, 80% of the world’s naval power, and 90% of the actually free nations. If we stand together, Chinese and Russian power looks pathetic, even if the rest of the BRICS throw in with them. Only by dividing the free world can the authoritarians prevail.
The only reason that the EU is not an equal partner with the US is that Europe has be loathe to spend seriously on their military, or anger Russia and China, for economic reasons. Hopefully the Ukraine War has cured this naivete. Japan also seems ready to become the leader of the free world in Asia.
The democracies need to become a three pillared alliance 1) US/Canada, 2) European NATO/EU, 3) Pacific allies. If India has any sense, they’ll join the other democracies of Asia in opposing China. There’s no reason the US needs to be more than one leg of this stool.

Jürg Gassmann
Jürg Gassmann
1 year ago

What utter, dangerous drivel.
If you claim to be the good guy, you actually have to BE the good guy.
When the Soviet Union dissolved, the US had a unique opportunity to shape the world for the future where the US would inevitably lose its unipolar status – inevitable because of demographics and the very success of the market economy model.
The US has squandered this opportunity. Instead of strengthening international law, the US went on a spree of illegal wars of aggression, against Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya etc. etc., fought with a brutality and disrespect for the norms of civilisation that revealed the rank hypocrisy of “Western standards”.
Yes, the rule of law used to be a bedrock of soft power, built over centuries. But the US has been abusing it for decades, simply stealing the gold and central bank deposits of Venezuela and Afghanistan, and then stealing the assets of individuals simply on the basis of a passport, without any due process whatsoever.
If the US had at least been good at it – but the US has been dismally inept, both in diplomacy and on the battlefield. US diplomacy used to be “speak softly and carry a big stick.” The “stick” turns out to be a twig. Ignoring the palate-cleansing invasions of Panama and Grenada, the US has not won a war since WW II – and that was won as an alliance with Britain and Russia. The US defeats in Iraq and Afghanistan were humiliating.
In diplomacy, “speak softly” had been replaced with open threats and hectoring. International institutions have been subverted to blatantly serve US interests. There is no subtlety at all.
The US (and the EU) are now at the flamboyant drunk stage, in such c**k-sure denial that we believe we have deceived all around us that we no longer hide our drinking. We are convinced all around us see our image of ourselves, and not the moral wreck we have become, and we are utterly resistant to any intervention. We’ll have to hit rock bottom before anything changes. And that is coming, the sooner the better for us and everyone.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Jürg Gassmann

How are things in Bakhmut and Avdiivka?
Looks like having the EU and the US on your side yields far more benefits than any from China or Russia.
Just ask the Armenians.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago
Reply to  Jürg Gassmann

How are things in Bakhmut and Avdiivka?
Looks like having the EU and the US on your side yields far more benefits than any from China or Russia.
Just ask the Armenians.

Jürg Gassmann
Jürg Gassmann
1 year ago

What utter, dangerous drivel.
If you claim to be the good guy, you actually have to BE the good guy.
When the Soviet Union dissolved, the US had a unique opportunity to shape the world for the future where the US would inevitably lose its unipolar status – inevitable because of demographics and the very success of the market economy model.
The US has squandered this opportunity. Instead of strengthening international law, the US went on a spree of illegal wars of aggression, against Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya etc. etc., fought with a brutality and disrespect for the norms of civilisation that revealed the rank hypocrisy of “Western standards”.
Yes, the rule of law used to be a bedrock of soft power, built over centuries. But the US has been abusing it for decades, simply stealing the gold and central bank deposits of Venezuela and Afghanistan, and then stealing the assets of individuals simply on the basis of a passport, without any due process whatsoever.
If the US had at least been good at it – but the US has been dismally inept, both in diplomacy and on the battlefield. US diplomacy used to be “speak softly and carry a big stick.” The “stick” turns out to be a twig. Ignoring the palate-cleansing invasions of Panama and Grenada, the US has not won a war since WW II – and that was won as an alliance with Britain and Russia. The US defeats in Iraq and Afghanistan were humiliating.
In diplomacy, “speak softly” had been replaced with open threats and hectoring. International institutions have been subverted to blatantly serve US interests. There is no subtlety at all.
The US (and the EU) are now at the flamboyant drunk stage, in such c**k-sure denial that we believe we have deceived all around us that we no longer hide our drinking. We are convinced all around us see our image of ourselves, and not the moral wreck we have become, and we are utterly resistant to any intervention. We’ll have to hit rock bottom before anything changes. And that is coming, the sooner the better for us and everyone.

AC Harper
AC Harper
1 year ago

Despite the apparent long period of Pax America the nature of world politics has always been Risk. From Wikipedia:

Risk is a strategy board game of diplomacy, conflict and conquest for two to six players. The standard version is played on a board depicting a political map of the world, divided into 42 territories, which are grouped into six continents.

And if the USA have stumbled into a less dominant position then they have done it to themselves in a series of unforced errors.

AC Harper
AC Harper
1 year ago

Despite the apparent long period of Pax America the nature of world politics has always been Risk. From Wikipedia:

Risk is a strategy board game of diplomacy, conflict and conquest for two to six players. The standard version is played on a board depicting a political map of the world, divided into 42 territories, which are grouped into six continents.

And if the USA have stumbled into a less dominant position then they have done it to themselves in a series of unforced errors.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago

“In a tripolar world, with America, Russia and China operating as individual actors, any alliance between two great powers inevitably spells doom for the third.”
Stop right there. Anyone who thinks that Russia is still a great power is deluded. Russia is in terminal decline as a power. China has already peaked – the demographics don’t lie here.
The USA will do just fine. If Russia and China (who are not natural allies by any stretch) want to start up a new Cold War, they’ll lose.
And there is no “Global South”.
Too many commentators with too little real current or historical knowledge and too much time on their hands. And too much media space to fill.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago

“In a tripolar world, with America, Russia and China operating as individual actors, any alliance between two great powers inevitably spells doom for the third.”
Stop right there. Anyone who thinks that Russia is still a great power is deluded. Russia is in terminal decline as a power. China has already peaked – the demographics don’t lie here.
The USA will do just fine. If Russia and China (who are not natural allies by any stretch) want to start up a new Cold War, they’ll lose.
And there is no “Global South”.
Too many commentators with too little real current or historical knowledge and too much time on their hands. And too much media space to fill.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

What a pity we didn’t prosecute the War of 1812 with a little more vigour.

Having burnt Washington DC to the ground, destroyed both the US Navy and the merchant marine, and thus wrecked their trade, we should have exploited the divisions highlighted by the Hartford Convention and divided the place in two.

New England and New York back into the Empire, the rest, an enfeebled Republic with a rather ‘rinky-dink’ slave economy, that could have been chastised and perhaps even incorporated at a later date.

However the opportunity for profit and plunder in India and the Far East proved just too strong, and thus a major strategic opportunity was lost, to the detriment of the entire World, it must be said.

Steven Campbell
Steven Campbell
1 year ago

History is so simple when you imagine it rather than know it. The Empire was much more attached to Cotton, Tobacco and other Southern crops than the competitive industry of the North. As someone once said, “follow the money”.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

But New England made the opening move and that should have been exploited.

Incidentally there was much “ competitive industry” in the north in 1814 as you may know.

As to Cotton & Tobacco we didn’t need to control the source, as is owners were quite happy sell and allow people such the Glasgow Tobacco Barons to control the market.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

But New England made the opening move and that should have been exploited.

Incidentally there was much “ competitive industry” in the north in 1814 as you may know.

As to Cotton & Tobacco we didn’t need to control the source, as is owners were quite happy sell and allow people such the Glasgow Tobacco Barons to control the market.

Arthur G
Arthur G
1 year ago

The US population was growing far too fast for the English to maintain control. If the US had stayed in the Empire, the Capital would have been in New York, rather than London before too long.

If the English had somehow managed to enfeeble the US, you would have lost WW1 badly. Without US industry and loans, the Allies would have been finished in 1916. If Wilson hadn’t allowed un-collateralized lending to the UK by US banks, the UK was set to collapse finacially in 1917.

Last edited 1 year ago by Arthur G
CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

Just under 9million in 1814, and virtually defenceless.

However you are absolutely correct about 1914-18.

tim richardson
tim richardson
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

Now, the City of London is a colony of Wall Street

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

Just under 9million in 1814, and virtually defenceless.

However you are absolutely correct about 1914-18.

tim richardson
tim richardson
1 year ago
Reply to  Arthur G

Now, the City of London is a colony of Wall Street

Studio Largo
Studio Largo
1 year ago

Good God Almighty, why don’t you just reimagine the American Revolutionary War while you’re at it?

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Studio Largo

No need for profanity, but we didn’t stand a chance from 1778-83, as also we had to contend with France, Spain and the Netherlands, and the ‘Armed Neutrality’ of Russia & Co.

Without ‘them’ if would have been different.

Studio Largo
Studio Largo
1 year ago

You’re missing the point of what I’m saying, which your last sentence so amply illustrates. Allow me to extend your fantasy further: a British victory in the War of 1812 and subsequent recolonization of America would have made the UK the mightiest empire ever and it would still be today, etc, etc. All in all, I don’t think that Great Britain fared so badly with its former colonies as its ally, considering for instance the multiple foreign policy blunders which led to the rise of the Third Reich. Though I guess in your ‘if only’ reimagining of history, none of that would have happened.

Studio Largo
Studio Largo
1 year ago

You’re missing the point of what I’m saying, which your last sentence so amply illustrates. Allow me to extend your fantasy further: a British victory in the War of 1812 and subsequent recolonization of America would have made the UK the mightiest empire ever and it would still be today, etc, etc. All in all, I don’t think that Great Britain fared so badly with its former colonies as its ally, considering for instance the multiple foreign policy blunders which led to the rise of the Third Reich. Though I guess in your ‘if only’ reimagining of history, none of that would have happened.

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  Studio Largo

No need for profanity, but we didn’t stand a chance from 1778-83, as also we had to contend with France, Spain and the Netherlands, and the ‘Armed Neutrality’ of Russia & Co.

Without ‘them’ if would have been different.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

I doubt if Britain could have ruled the US from abroad. Too many people with too many grievances against Britain had already settled the eastern half of the country.
For better or worse, Britain could never make the US into another Canada.
Oh, and by the way, Britain also lost the last battle. 😉

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Yes, but the ‘last battle’ was completely irrelevant as you well know, because the Peace Treaty had already been signed in Ghent had it not?

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Yes, but the ‘last battle’ was completely irrelevant as you well know, because the Peace Treaty had already been signed in Ghent had it not?

Steven Campbell
Steven Campbell
1 year ago

History is so simple when you imagine it rather than know it. The Empire was much more attached to Cotton, Tobacco and other Southern crops than the competitive industry of the North. As someone once said, “follow the money”.

Arthur G
Arthur G
1 year ago

The US population was growing far too fast for the English to maintain control. If the US had stayed in the Empire, the Capital would have been in New York, rather than London before too long.

If the English had somehow managed to enfeeble the US, you would have lost WW1 badly. Without US industry and loans, the Allies would have been finished in 1916. If Wilson hadn’t allowed un-collateralized lending to the UK by US banks, the UK was set to collapse finacially in 1917.

Last edited 1 year ago by Arthur G
Studio Largo
Studio Largo
1 year ago

Good God Almighty, why don’t you just reimagine the American Revolutionary War while you’re at it?

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

I doubt if Britain could have ruled the US from abroad. Too many people with too many grievances against Britain had already settled the eastern half of the country.
For better or worse, Britain could never make the US into another Canada.
Oh, and by the way, Britain also lost the last battle. 😉

CHARLES STANHOPE
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago

What a pity we didn’t prosecute the War of 1812 with a little more vigour.

Having burnt Washington DC to the ground, destroyed both the US Navy and the merchant marine, and thus wrecked their trade, we should have exploited the divisions highlighted by the Hartford Convention and divided the place in two.

New England and New York back into the Empire, the rest, an enfeebled Republic with a rather ‘rinky-dink’ slave economy, that could have been chastised and perhaps even incorporated at a later date.

However the opportunity for profit and plunder in India and the Far East proved just too strong, and thus a major strategic opportunity was lost, to the detriment of the entire World, it must be said.

P Branagan
P Branagan
1 year ago

“How much evidence is required before it is clear that Western Civilization is empty of integrity, judgment, reason, morality, empathy, compassion, self-awareness, truth, empty of everything that Western Civilization once respected?
All that is left of the West is insouciance and unrestrained evil.”

~Paul Craig Roberts, former Undersecretary Of Treasury, Reagan Administration

Mr Stokes matches that description of the West almost perfectly.

P Branagan
P Branagan
1 year ago

“How much evidence is required before it is clear that Western Civilization is empty of integrity, judgment, reason, morality, empathy, compassion, self-awareness, truth, empty of everything that Western Civilization once respected?
All that is left of the West is insouciance and unrestrained evil.”

~Paul Craig Roberts, former Undersecretary Of Treasury, Reagan Administration

Mr Stokes matches that description of the West almost perfectly.

JR Stoker
JR Stoker
1 year ago

The USA is still an incredibly strong bloc, with massive resources, not least, of intellectual energy (and indeed the physical stuff), great drive, educational standards ahead of most of the rest of the world, huge research and development capabilities, and the amazing blessings of capitalism.
Her bad news at the moment is the two old buffoons scrapping to be President, but their time will pass; in a maximum of five years. Like the advent of Reagan in 1980 post the failures of Carter, with a little luck a leader will soon appear who can sooth and heal the divisions.

Bernard Davis
Bernard Davis
1 year ago
Reply to  JR Stoker

Intellectual energy, sure. Over 360 school shooting attacks last year, 93 so far this year.. really amazing blessings.

JR Stoker
JR Stoker
1 year ago
Reply to  Bernard Davis

The shooting attacks are of course terrible, each an awful tragedy. But does not alter the fact that the educational system is a very good one and produces some of the best intellects in the world

JR Stoker
JR Stoker
1 year ago
Reply to  Bernard Davis

The shooting attacks are of course terrible, each an awful tragedy. But does not alter the fact that the educational system is a very good one and produces some of the best intellects in the world

Andrew Stoll
Andrew Stoll
1 year ago
Reply to  JR Stoker

I agree. And as the two buffon’s time will pass in due course and better leaders hopefully emerge, the woke, leftist fad will also have done it’s damage and moved on and intellectualism returned to more wholesome, cultured and benign role models.
Unchecked immigration and runaway demographics across North America is also an unknown quantity for the future of the ‘West’. A problem China and Russia luckily do not have. In tomorrow’s world ageing populations will likely prove to be the lesser evil.

Peter Lee
Peter Lee
1 year ago
Reply to  JR Stoker

I do not think you realise how bad things are in the US.

JR Stoker
JR Stoker
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter Lee

Not as bad as the media likes to portray, but not as good as they should be.

tim richardson
tim richardson
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter Lee

I live in the US, things are great here. Life is good. People are wonderful.

JR Stoker
JR Stoker
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter Lee

Not as bad as the media likes to portray, but not as good as they should be.

tim richardson
tim richardson
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter Lee

I live in the US, things are great here. Life is good. People are wonderful.

Bernard Davis
Bernard Davis
1 year ago
Reply to  JR Stoker

Intellectual energy, sure. Over 360 school shooting attacks last year, 93 so far this year.. really amazing blessings.

Andrew Stoll
Andrew Stoll
1 year ago
Reply to  JR Stoker

I agree. And as the two buffon’s time will pass in due course and better leaders hopefully emerge, the woke, leftist fad will also have done it’s damage and moved on and intellectualism returned to more wholesome, cultured and benign role models.
Unchecked immigration and runaway demographics across North America is also an unknown quantity for the future of the ‘West’. A problem China and Russia luckily do not have. In tomorrow’s world ageing populations will likely prove to be the lesser evil.

Peter Lee
Peter Lee
1 year ago
Reply to  JR Stoker

I do not think you realise how bad things are in the US.

JR Stoker
JR Stoker
1 year ago

The USA is still an incredibly strong bloc, with massive resources, not least, of intellectual energy (and indeed the physical stuff), great drive, educational standards ahead of most of the rest of the world, huge research and development capabilities, and the amazing blessings of capitalism.
Her bad news at the moment is the two old buffoons scrapping to be President, but their time will pass; in a maximum of five years. Like the advent of Reagan in 1980 post the failures of Carter, with a little luck a leader will soon appear who can sooth and heal the divisions.

mfx v
mfx v
1 year ago

Hopium

mfx v
mfx v
1 year ago

Hopium

mike otter
mike otter
1 year ago

You’d hope our Emporers would learn from their mistakes when Yeltsin was in power – bring a post Putin Russia back in. Yeltsin was denied entry to the clearing banks and WTO systems, look what we got: Kleptocrats then Putin. If we let them play then 1. we can keep an eye on them and 2. They have as much to lose as we from any economic fallout.

Last edited 1 year ago by mike otter
mike otter
mike otter
1 year ago

You’d hope our Emporers would learn from their mistakes when Yeltsin was in power – bring a post Putin Russia back in. Yeltsin was denied entry to the clearing banks and WTO systems, look what we got: Kleptocrats then Putin. If we let them play then 1. we can keep an eye on them and 2. They have as much to lose as we from any economic fallout.

Last edited 1 year ago by mike otter
martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Very good piece on why changes to the international order aren’t coming any time soon.
Also, some rather foolish sub-Marxist reveries in the comments. Indeed, it’s been going on since at least the 1950s:
–The “third world” was going to economically surpass the First.
–Then radical Marxist revolutionaries were going to topple US hegemony
–THEN radical Muslims were going to destroy the First World’s “stranglehold” on the rest.
–Now the BRICS (finally!) are going to overtake and surpass senile old Europe and America.
FACTS:
–China is going to undergo the same stagnation as Japan saw from the 80’s on–and for the same reason. An inevitable population decline brought on by 30 years of the one-child policy. Simply too late to rectify.
–Brazil has even bigger political divisions than the states.
–India is stuck in the middle income trap, and the Hindu nationalist who runs the place would rather suppress Muslims than grow his economy or prepare for climate change.
–South Africa can’t even produce enough electricity to power its nation 24 hours a day.
–And finally, Russia is bent on a suicidal war, having squandered nearly all of its military on futile ground attacks on Ukraine’s cities, and even more futile attacks to freeze those cities out (they haven’t, and won’t). Read Russians like Strelkov and Kalashnikov for what’s really going on.
Every nation on earth could do with better governance.
But the ill-governed, mostly dictatorial nations of the BRICS and the Third World are the very last models any nation ought to follow.
The US and the EU do well, not because they have the best possible societies
But because they are better than all the rest…

Last edited 1 year ago by martin logan
tim richardson
tim richardson
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Also because the USA makes all it’s own food and can supply all the oil we need to keep the lights on.
We can source labor and raw materials (especially labor) from Mexico and Canada (thanks, NAFTA!). Colombia, too.
Meanwhile Europe is hoping they can get along with each other (look to history for that answer) so they can fend off Russia.
China is, well, China.
Most nations other than the USA and our close friends are hoping they can find nearby trading partners to buy food, otherwise, they’ll be sitting by themselves, cold and alone, in the dark.

tim richardson
tim richardson
1 year ago
Reply to  martin logan

Also because the USA makes all it’s own food and can supply all the oil we need to keep the lights on.
We can source labor and raw materials (especially labor) from Mexico and Canada (thanks, NAFTA!). Colombia, too.
Meanwhile Europe is hoping they can get along with each other (look to history for that answer) so they can fend off Russia.
China is, well, China.
Most nations other than the USA and our close friends are hoping they can find nearby trading partners to buy food, otherwise, they’ll be sitting by themselves, cold and alone, in the dark.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

Very good piece on why changes to the international order aren’t coming any time soon.
Also, some rather foolish sub-Marxist reveries in the comments. Indeed, it’s been going on since at least the 1950s:
–The “third world” was going to economically surpass the First.
–Then radical Marxist revolutionaries were going to topple US hegemony
–THEN radical Muslims were going to destroy the First World’s “stranglehold” on the rest.
–Now the BRICS (finally!) are going to overtake and surpass senile old Europe and America.
FACTS:
–China is going to undergo the same stagnation as Japan saw from the 80’s on–and for the same reason. An inevitable population decline brought on by 30 years of the one-child policy. Simply too late to rectify.
–Brazil has even bigger political divisions than the states.
–India is stuck in the middle income trap, and the Hindu nationalist who runs the place would rather suppress Muslims than grow his economy or prepare for climate change.
–South Africa can’t even produce enough electricity to power its nation 24 hours a day.
–And finally, Russia is bent on a suicidal war, having squandered nearly all of its military on futile ground attacks on Ukraine’s cities, and even more futile attacks to freeze those cities out (they haven’t, and won’t). Read Russians like Strelkov and Kalashnikov for what’s really going on.
Every nation on earth could do with better governance.
But the ill-governed, mostly dictatorial nations of the BRICS and the Third World are the very last models any nation ought to follow.
The US and the EU do well, not because they have the best possible societies
But because they are better than all the rest…

Last edited 1 year ago by martin logan
Dougie Undersub
Dougie Undersub
1 year ago

One thing’s for sure, Putin is now Xi’s poodle. Everything else is quite uncertain.

Dougie Undersub
Dougie Undersub
1 year ago

One thing’s for sure, Putin is now Xi’s poodle. Everything else is quite uncertain.

martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

It’s pretty simple, really.
If you can create a Rule of Law nation that doesn’t allow crooks to steal most of the national wealth and sock it away in Switzerland, you have a shot at a better life.
If you create a society where one Dear Leader decides to do things like annexing other countries (China, Russia), or suppressing internal minorities (India, China), or steal most of the wealth for a very few (South Africa, Russia), most people won’t have a better life.
Although at least one of the leaders of the above will get a really cool billion-pound mansion.
But perhaps that’s all refuted by the Finnish and Swiss Colonial Empires?
The atrocities those two imperialist nations committed in Africa, South America and Asia were beyond belief !!!

Last edited 1 year ago by martin logan
martin logan
martin logan
1 year ago

It’s pretty simple, really.
If you can create a Rule of Law nation that doesn’t allow crooks to steal most of the national wealth and sock it away in Switzerland, you have a shot at a better life.
If you create a society where one Dear Leader decides to do things like annexing other countries (China, Russia), or suppressing internal minorities (India, China), or steal most of the wealth for a very few (South Africa, Russia), most people won’t have a better life.
Although at least one of the leaders of the above will get a really cool billion-pound mansion.
But perhaps that’s all refuted by the Finnish and Swiss Colonial Empires?
The atrocities those two imperialist nations committed in Africa, South America and Asia were beyond belief !!!

Last edited 1 year ago by martin logan