US Foreign Policy: The Definition of Insanity
A much over-used cliché is that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result, but it does so perfectly describe current US foreign policy. This policy orientation stems from the unipolar moment that resulted from the collapse of the Soviet bloc in the context of a still relatively feeble China. That moment has passed, but the US foreign policy elite cannot conceptualize the new reality that the US is no longer the undisputed dominator of the global order and must in fact deal with a strong China that is allied with a rejuvenated Russia. There is talk of another Cold War, but this era is very different to the previous one in that the US will not accept the need to compromise with China and Russia with respect to their core national interests, nor provide them with basic diplomatic respect; as is required for functioning diplomatic relations. At the same time the US state has proven itself “agreement incapable” through the repeated reneging of agreements; from that made with Gorbachev not to extend NATO into Eastern Europe in the 1990s, to the more recent US abrogation of the JCPOA with Iran and the backing of Ukraine in the abrogation of the Minsk Accords.
In the 1980s, a Canadian professor entered his “tit for tat” algorithm into computer-based iterated prisoner’s dilemma tournaments and it wiped the floor with many other much, much more complicated algorithms. Tit for Tat used a very simple approach, “cooperate on the first round, on the next rounds with the same opponent do what that opponent did on the previous round”, expressed in all of five lines of Fortran code. This is the simple approach that the Russians and Chinese have now learnt to utilize with the US, facilitated by the rise of China and the rejuvenation of Russia that removes the ability of the US to bully them into accepting actions against their national interest. As long as the US refuses to cooperate, then China and Russia (and now Iran) will not cooperate. At the same time both nations have taken steps to remove the ability of the US to manipulate their domestic politics (e.g. laws restricting/forbidding foreign states, NGOs etc. from domestic political manipulation) and to reduce the ability of the US to economically damage them. The natural result is that of the self-perceived unstoppable force (which it is no longer) meeting the immovable object.
This has started to create significant cognitive dissonance for the US foreign policy elite, but they are unwilling at least for now to make the changes in their worldview required to match the new reality to reduce that dissonance. Instead, they try to slip around this new obstacle and bad-mouth the immovable object. The a la carte style foreign policy of “we will cooperate where it benefits us and not cooperate where it doesn’t” has already been seen for what it is, and the immovable object simply replies with “benefits must be mutual and respect our red lines”. The US has tried to get lots of countries on its side so that it can use a joint effort to intimidate and harm the unstoppable force, but that has been met with very limited success – apart from its fellow white settler colonies and a few other habitually subservient nations. ASEAN is having none of it, Turkey is on its own “special” wandering path, the Gulf Cooperation Council is far too busy selling oil and gas to China, and India is being its usual non-aligned self while continuing its good historical relationship with Russia. One result has been increasing tantrum-like provocations with respect to Taiwan and Ukraine, or perhaps they are attempts to get the immovable object to make a mistake which will bring nations into the US camp. Another has been aggressive tactics towards erstwhile allies that push for actions that may damage those nation’s national interests – such as the sanctions against Russia that damaged Europe much more than the US, and the stalling of the Nordstream 2 pipeline. If such things were not bad enough, the US elites just can’t help themselves when it comes to short-term profits; a good example being the current sales of US “freedom” natural gas to Asian markets rather than to quench Europe’s natural gas shortages, which have been at least partially produced by the Nordstream 2 delays! It seems that the US prefers exporting “freedom” to Asia much more than to Europe, especially at the prices available.
The immovable object of the alignment of Russia with China, brings huge benefits to both and creates a whole that is much stronger than its parts. With Russia as its ally, China no longer needs to worry about its northern border, Central Asia can be kept quiet, fossil fuels (especially natural gas) can be sourced from an ally, it can benefit from Russian military technology and might, can be aided by Russia’s diplomatic relations to other nations (such as India), and take advantage of Russia’s geographical position set astride Eurasia . With China as its ally, Russia has a fast-growing market to sell its natural resources and food etc. to that is not affected by US-driven sanctions, does not have to worry about its own eastern borders, and has a partner to help develop its economy. Together, the two may also come to dominate the Eurasian continent, barring perhaps the European archipelago and the sad delusional island that sits just off that archipelago’s coast. The US had much opportunity to include Russia in the Western camp but blew it through a combination of hubris, greed, and outright disrespect. That opportunity has now gone, and even if it still existed the US foreign policy elite are unable to stomach the humble pie required; instead they just keep reinforcing Russia’s alliance with China.
It is in the interests of the immovable object to sit back and watch the US continue to blunder around while keeping the diplomatic water simmering somewhere below the boil-over level, while making it abundantly clear that they are ready to act if their red lines are crossed. When watching your opponent slowly stab themselves to death, better to keep a distance while holding a gun in case he makes a lunge for you. The immovable object’s policy elites are all extremely experienced and level-headed and one does get a sense of annoyed grandparents managing their self-control while issuing warnings in the face of the unruly grand nephews and nieces. The US needs a grown-up foreign policy, one that doesn’t believe in its own propaganda and accepts the reality of the world as it is. Unfortunately, that may require a root and branch restructuring of the institutions involved given their inability to accept any policy diversity within their ranks (or within the heads of US Presidents). Without such a grown-up foreign policy the US will continue to either wither slowly or meet the same fate as the UK and France at Suez; the reality check can be brutal when it comes. Of course, the other possibility is that they do something really stupid and we all pay the price. So, I wish the US foreign policy elite the best of psychological and emotional health, and the introspection and self-knowledge necessary to accept the required therapy; that would be best for us all, because the alternative would be insane.