The Burden of World Leadership
Security threats to the United States today are unprecedented. The main antagonists of the United States are Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran. In addition to having a nuclear arsenal, almost all of these countries have enormous economic, scientific, technical, and military capabilities. Although the dynamics of relations with each of these countries are different, they all remain a threat. Some are more manageable and predictable, like China, and some are less so, like Russia or North Korea. It may not lead to active aggression but specific steps against US national interests that pose significant security challenges. Logically, the United States should respond to these challenges by taking strong and consistent action. However, the paradox is that the split between Republicans and Democrats makes it impossible for the American establishment to work systematically to convince Americans that events in China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran and the conflicts they provoke are of direct importance to them and their future.
All antagonists of the US share a common position that the United States, like other democracies, is already on the path of decline. They base their argument on professed isolationism, political polarization, and internal disorder. For them, this means that the time has come to restore their "empires," global influence, or "regain respect." The danger here is not only in the "restoration of empires" and the rise of authoritarianism but also in the fact that Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea are prone to miscalculations that could have catastrophic consequences. Russia's insidious invasion of Ukraine is an example of akin consequences.
The United States is now on the verge of, or even amid, a new Cold War that requires a consolidated, coherent strategy from all American parties and groups. After all, the U.S. won the Cold War by remaining united. For nine consecutive presidential terms, there was no discussion about who the enemy was and who needed help. What is happening now? Congress is still debating the allocation of aid to Ukraine and Israel, and some congressmen are repeating the narratives of Moscow's propaganda. All this is happening against the backdrop of the United States finding itself in a difficult security situation: an unstable and unreliable (for allies) government is an invitation to authoritarian opponents/rivals to test the United States. Russia tried to do this by attacking Ukraine, and the same goes for Hamas as Iran's proxy for Israel. It is likely to be the beginning.
Challenges for the United States from China and Russia
China seeks to turn its state into a dominant world power by 2049. In particular, this strategy includes the return of Taiwan. In this context, China is actively modernizing its army, with a deadline of 2035. For Xi, this is a personal challenge that would help him gain the glory of Mao Zedong. All this creates a high risk of war, perhaps not now, but certainly in the foreseeable future. It may be a miscalculation similar to the one made by Russian dictator Vladimir Putin by invading Ukraine in 2022. However, the consequences for the United States would be greater in an akin scenario. Therefore, the Americans should be interested in Russia losing, setting an example for everyone else, including China, that aggression is doomed to fail. Instead, the US establishment is debating whether and how much to help Ukraine. At the same time, Ukraine is a key to deterring China from intervening in Taiwan.
In addition to the military threat, China is challenging the United States in the economic and information spheres. China is a trading partner of more than 100 countries, and it is systematically implementing the One Belt, One Road initiative, which involves hundreds of states. In addition, China has a powerful propaganda machine that reaches almost all corners of the world and promotes state agenda, including messages about the "decline of the West," "the superiority of the Chinese development model," and similar narratives. Do Americans want to live in a world where their closest neighbors look up to a competitor who seeks to take away all the advantages they have?
Russia wants to restore its empire, which is why it needs Ukraine. At the same time, Russia is an enemy of the United States and NATO. Its main danger to the United States is, first of all, Putin’s tendency to make miscalculations and take rash steps that, without exaggeration, could have far-reaching catastrophic consequences. By invading Ukraine, Moscow has not weakened the Alliance or divided it. On the contrary, it has strengthened NATO. One could argue that the actions of the Russian dictator have contributed to the expansion of the bloc. However, this is the result of miscalculations that Putin will seek to correct at any cost. Despite its losses in Ukraine, the Russian army retains the largest nuclear arsenal in the world, including tactical nuclear weapons, and continues to threaten NATO countries.
Any success in Ukraine would whet the appetite of dictator Putin. He would view any concessions as weaknesses and an invitation to more aggressive actions. This was the case in 2008 when Russia invaded Georgia. The West didn’t respond appropriately. In 2014, Russia annexed Crimea. The West didn’t respond, again. In the same year, Russia started a war in Eastern Ukraine. The West did nothing. A similar situation could have happened in 2022 if the Ukrainian people had not shown resilience in defending their homeland. Of course, the United States is currently providing Ukraine with significant assistance. Unfortunately, it is not enough to achieve success and stop the aggressor. Instead of debates about expanding aid, today, we have discussions about providing it. This strange situation has become possible precisely because of the internal division in the United States, which threatens the country's position as a world leader and directly affects its allies and partners.
Russia's interest is in discord in the United States and Europe, filling the gaps in the West's presence in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia while undermining the United States' position in the Global South. Just like China, Russia continues to have a significant propaganda resource that promotes the idea of the "Western decline," especially of the United States, which is allegedly no longer able to protect its allies and partners. Therefore, the countries should focus on new points of support – the Russian Federation and the DPRK.
Strengths and Weaknesses of the United States
It is hardly possible to say that the United States is inferior to Russia, China, or other antagonistic countries. The American economy is in a strong position, and the country's scientific and technological progress is developing rapidly, creating new opportunities. Russia's invasion of Ukraine has allowed the United States to regain its lost diplomatic ground: the Americans are strengthening NATO, and assistance to Ukraine is evidence of a reliable partnership. The United States is also playing well against China in Asia and Europe. Militarily, the United States is also building up its capabilities, including nuclear weapons. In general, no one can match its defense spending.
At the same time, in domestic politics, specifically in decision-making, the US experiences political dysfunction and division of the American ruling class. The United States needs more military power to counter threats. However, the debate over rising entitlement spending, the debt ceiling, appropriations bills, and the failure to pass military appropriations bills before the start of the next fiscal year are obstacles to achieving this goal.
What to Do?
The confrontation between the United States and its allies with Russia, China, Iran, and their satellites is gaining momentum. In this situation, the United States must have a bipartisan agreement on the country's role in the world. Without it, it is difficult to count on success. At the same time, American politicians from both parties should counteract the isolationist sentiments of Americans, refraining from using them during elections. They should explain that their fate is inextricably linked to global events. Yes, US global leadership has its price, but is it possible to ensure peace and prosperity without it?
Politicians must explain to Americans in unison that, for example, Ukraine's loss in the war with Russia is likely to lead to further Russian aggression in Europe, which is a high risk of a war between NATO and Russia. Then, the price the Americans will have to pay will be very high. In addition, Ukraine's success in the war against Russia also deters China from making rash decisions regarding Taiwan, to which the United States has much more obligations. The United States' support for its allies is also a matter of reliability as a partner. Without U.S. leadership, the world is likely to slide into a hunting ground for authoritarian predators, and how this will affect Americans at home is a big question. The support of American citizens for US global leadership should be a priority for American politicians. Otherwise, the country will be pushed to the periphery of the world order, no matter how strange it may sound now.
In addition, the United States should focus on public diplomacy, actively promoting favorable narratives and alternatives to competitors' projects. In other words, the US needs a comprehensive global information policy, tailored to specific regions and based on relevant strategies.
As a result, Americans must decide who will own the future. China, Russia, Iran, or the United States and its allies? If you are still more inclined to isolationism, ask yourself: what can the world come to if authoritarian countries, prone to risky decisions, are in charge? Are you sure that you will not be affected?