Last week I alluded to the US once again mistaking force for power. In the process, the current administration shattered its moral standing with threats to wipe out Iran’s civilization. NATO allies and the Gulf states sat in muted horror. America weakened itself — and the world economy in a single ill-considered stroke.

Although not defeated militarily by Iran, the US is re-discovering the limits of military supremacy. Senior military officers know that the military is but a single aspect of PMESII.* National power is much more complex than just having a strong military. The current civilian leadership in America has yet to learn that lesson.

Arguably, the US has given up the leadership of the free world. Certainly, the United States remains enormously powerful, the sun has not yet set on American power. Yet. For almost a century, the United States established, nurtured, and led a system of alliances and institutions that not only promoted American values and interests, but also prevented armed conflicts among the great powers. Pax Americana is evaporating — and it’s doing so because legitimacy and trust is vanishing.

Trust in American leadership, judgment, and good intentions is eroding. When you attack a country without consulting your allies, and then retroactively try to enlist them in helping you it is no surprise that trust is weakened. When you threaten an ally in an alliance you lead (Greenland and NATO) judgement is called into question. When you denigrate a system that you’ve created because you decided that your partners are not worthy of you, your leadership is forfeit.

America wants the benefits of hegemony without the responsibilities. It seems the US president wants to wield superpowers without being held accountable for his actions. He behaves like he is still the host of a bad reality TV show. He has “fired” the president of Venezuela, killed the supreme leader of Iran and insulted the leaders of practically every democracy in the Western world. This is not leadership and the world is getting reading to abandon him and the country he “leads.”

In Davos, PM Mark Carney spoke of rupture. “The old order is not coming back. We shouldn’t mourn it.” And so countries formerly bound to the US are making other arrangements. They are diversifying their partnerships. Canada more actively — and successfully — than most. Can the Chinese succeed America as the world’s leader? I think not, but America’s weakened standing certainly cedes power to China. Clearly China is already trying to become that leader. They’re signaling that they, and not the US, offer stability.

The Economist, among others, has said that China the biggest winner in this war. We’ll see. That may be true for the moment, but China’s current strength is unsustainable, but that is an issue for another post.

New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan have reported on how Trump decided to go to war. In the essay they say “Everyone deferred to the president’s instincts. They had seen him make bold decisions, take on unfathomable risks and somehow come out on top.”

That, to me, was just an extraordinary moment. This chronic lack of self-reflection, of self-doubt, that you see in the domestic arena is certainly far more important when it’s matters of war and peace.

---

*PMESII is an analytical tool – a starting point to assess national power. It stands for Political, Military, Economic, Social, Information, and Infrastructure.