It is at least strange that The Atlantic should write “The American era is over”. The end of global domination has come. They say that the historical turning point was formed with the war against Iran. But it is no coincidence that only these days have information been released about why Radcliffe, head of the CIA, suddenly flew to Moscow and had a conversation with his Russian counterpart Naryshkin. Not with Putin. Why is he traveling on a transport plane? Did he pick up the bodies of dead CIA agents? If so, it means that American superiority is no longer dominant. Apparently, the world has become one big village and secrets are quickly surfacing. It is increasingly being written that “it is surprising how suddenly this moment came”. Is it not a sudden surprise that the overwhelming power of the United States is insufficient to defeat Iran? A country, they say, with an economically stagnant regime, repressive and without modern weapons. Despite its failures in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, there was no doubt that Washington was able to mobilize financial, military and diplomatic resources like no other country in the world, and in times of crisis. And to achieve its goals. Now they talk about complacency, arrogance, overreach, which has left the American military vulnerable in a world where even cheap and mass-produced weapons can be targeted with deadly precision. In fact, Hormuz revealed the truth. But for all the criticism of Trump, one cannot help but note that the war in Iran has brought out long-standing problems. It is not the White House that has undermined US capabilities at this stage. It has simply become clear how much the dynamics of global power have changed and how much American power has diminished. Whatever else they tell us.
The regime in Tehran remained unshakable, despite the assassination of Ayatollah Khamenei and senior military officials. Iran's long-range missile and drone attacks bypassed US air defenses and disabled numerous facilities in the Persian Gulf. In less than 2 weeks, 17 US bases were disabled. Among them is the headquarters of the US Fifth Fleet in Bahrain. US military officials admitted to CBS News that “we are taking the strikes with our eyes closed, just watching the bases collapse”. Added with “this enormous damage is being hidden from the American public”. No missiles were isolated. Ground bases in Kuwait were reduced to ruins. The Pentagon reported a loss of 60 aircraft and equipment worth $3.7 billion. Many of the bases damaged by Iranian attacks have been largely abandoned due to ongoing threats of new attacks. Regarding the base in Bahrain, Admiral Connell, former chief of staff of the US Navy, stated that "we will not be going back there anytime soon". The cost of repairs will definitely make the US abandon the reconstruction of the bases altogether. Defending such facilities against a technologically less advanced adversary like Iran is not considered expedient. Just one of the conclusions of the war against Iran.
But the consequences of this war are not limited to the Middle East. The withdrawal of the aircraft carrier "George Washington" from Japan (the aim was to deter China) to replace the compromised "Abraham Lincoln" in the Arabian Sea is also a sign that the situation is difficult to control. And American military resources, no matter how superior they are to other countries, have fallen to very low levels. Their production rates will hardly replenish the necessary reserves soon. Another conclusion from this war. Some believe that it is the erosion of American manufacturing superiority that is the key to understanding that the end of the American era has come. Today, the United States, for example, hardly builds civilian ships (let alone icebreakers) on a global scale, while China produces 50% of the world's ships and controls about 80% of the world's drone production.
They say that the US army was built on the principle of being able to prevail in short-term conflicts of high intensity, but after the war against Iran, will it be able to engage in a long-term conflict with China? The conclusions behind the scenes are eloquent. Usually, the global superiority of the US is not only related to its own military and economic capacity, but the established system of alliances provides a strengthening of American power. The allies host American military bases, provide diplomatic support, share intelligence information, etc. But the war against Iran showed that the allies preferred to be "at arm's length". They did not provide the expected support. Apparently, Washington today feels a tangible need for the capabilities of the allies. It got to the point that Trump called them "insolent, annoying, obstacles". This was followed by the announcement of the withdrawal of 5 thousand American soldiers from Germany. The idea of reassessing the deployment of military forces in Europe is being launched. Are the allies losing trust in the US? Or are they building regional alliances like the Mecca Pact, but without giving up Washington's security umbrella? Oman is making no secret of its actions for closer cooperation with Tehran, and in Europe there is talk of a new continental defense structure. In the UAE, a diplomatic advisor to the president speaks of “restoring relations with Iran at some point, and this is inevitable because Iran remains our neighbor. Geography leaves us no choice but to engage”.
Conclusions are multiplying, but the fact that the world's energy security is under threat raises the question of whether this is a consequence of the war against Iran or a scenario of powers that have their dividends from hot regional conflicts with a global impact. And they are playing with the prices of energy products. As well as for production in the military-industrial complex. A half-working Hormuz and a closed Bab al-Mandeb in front of the Red Sea are mainly putting Europe on edge, while Washington is organizing secret meetings between Israel and the Arab monarchies in the style of the “Abraham Accords”. And in Germany. In the absence of diplomatic relations with Israel. The meeting was organized by Adm. Cooper, US Central Command, but Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Jordan and Egypt have not announced the holding of such a meeting. And it was for cooperation with Iran as well. After a failed meeting in Oman on the topic, but without Washington's participation. Uncoordinated regional meetings are definitely not acceptable. So much for sovereignty and security guarantees. While ignoring geopolitical players such as China and Russia, with whom, however, backstage talks and clarification of positions are being held without interruption. As they say, expect a “new Yalta” in late autumn in China, when Trump, Xi Jinping and Putin may meet. Because it is already clear that Washington is preparing the conditions for action in a different multipolar world. Whoever misses it will have to wait for the end of the war in Ukraine, which will inevitably confuse many calculations. Because, as they say, some wars are lost before they start. Guess who will be the loser. But who, when and how will stop these wars?