Historian Niall Ferguson says, “It will seem obvious that by 2033, if not sooner, that the pax americana—” the idea of an American hegemony dominating the globe — “faced a well-coordinated challenge from China, Russia, Iran and North Korea in the early 2020s.”
Future historians will marvel at all this. It will seem obvious by 2033, if not sooner, that the pax americana faced a well-coordinated challenge from China, Russia, Iran and North Korea in the early 2020s. The first move was the invasion of Ukraine. The second was the war of…
— Niall Ferguson (@nfergus) December 31, 2023
He continues:
The first move was the invasion of Ukraine. The second was the war of Iran’s proxies against Israel. The third will most likely be a Chinese challenge to American primacy in the Indo-Pacific, perhaps — if Xi Jinping is bold — a blockade of Taiwan.
If, in the course of 2024, Ukraine’s position becomes so vulnerable that its forces must withdraw from some contested territory, three immediate consequences will follow. First, more refugees will flow from Ukraine to Europe. … Second, private investors will be even less likely to risk their money on Ukraine. Third, European governments will have to get a lot more serious about their own defense spending, with all the obvious political headaches that implies.
For NATO as a whole, at 3.5% of GDP on defense spending would require $431 billion more per year — nearly twice the amount all countries have pledged to Ukraine since last year.
The pax americana seems to be ending. The fate of Ukraine — of Israel and Taiwan, too — hangs in the balance. I cannot say I am surprised. It was always very likely the overreach of the Global War on Terror would be requited in this way: with a resurgence of isolationism.
And that’s what’s happening inside the Biden administration now. The realist foreign policy that Donald Trump pursued was not, in fact, an appeasement-oriented foreign policy. The idea that Europe should pay its own way when it comes to military spending and that the United States would still be a muscular player in the world was not a bad idea from Trump. The idea of getting rid of NATO entirely was a bad idea, but the idea that NATO should actually be paid for by many of our allies was, of course, entirely true. They were relying on us for years to pay the freight when it came to their military spending.
The problem is Joe Biden came into office and his strategy has basically been to make broad statements that don’t materialize in the way he would like them to.
WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show
For example, the Ukraine war: Joe Biden never made clear what the exact interest was in the Ukraine war. Let’s say, at the very outset, Biden had said, “Listen, the interest in Ukraine is not to reverse the gains Russia made in 2014 because those are not reversible at this point given the state of the war. The purpose here is to repel any future Russian invasion of Ukraine, and we will provide military support necessary to do that.”
Right now, the broad scale perception in Russia would be that Russia was losing the war — because they did. They tried to invade Ukraine. They lost. It didn’t work. The United States, through its proxy in Ukraine, was able to completely degrade the Russian ability to make large scale war in Ukraine. That is a victory for the United States, and yet somehow it has turned into a loss.
Why?
Because Biden never anticipated nor articulated what exactly his goal was. Instead, he basically said Volodymyr Zelenskyy will establish the goal over in Ukraine, and Zelenskyy’s goal is not the United States’ goal. Zelenskyy’s goal is to repel Russia from the Donbas region, from Crimea. Push them out of all of those areas.
But that was never realistic. That was never going to happen, no matter how much military aid America provides—unless the United States is willing to start sending over F-16s. If that’s not going to happen, there is no way to break the stranglehold Russia has on those areas.
So right now, Vladimir Putin is just waiting out Joe Biden because Republicans have correctly said we need to know what the plan is here. And Biden is not articulating a plan.
Over the course of last week, Putin said Russia would increase the strikes on Ukraine. Putin’s bet all the way along has been very simple, which is that he is going to outlast the United States. The history of Russian war-making is to expend way too much material and way too many men in pursuit of a military goal. The history of Russian military conquest says, “We don’t really care very much about our own citizens, and we are willing to throw hundreds of thousands and millions of people at a problem.”
In World War I, the Russians were perfectly willing to sacrifice millions of people charging frontally blocked positions, charging machine gun positions with no weaponry. That’s actually part of the Russian military mentality. The notion that their mentality is going to be pushed off the ball by Biden basically saying Zelenskyy can make the case is not going to do it. So Putin is going to continue to ratchet up the pressure.
Basically, Putin is betting the West is simply going to give up on this. And the reality is that because of failures to articulate the goals and strategies, the West may, in fact, give up on Ukraine.
Now, if that happens, it is much more likely that China is going to become ever more militant.
China is watching a West in retreat around the globe from powers that should not have the West in retreat. Forget about Russia, which is a nuclear-armed power. When you look at the Middle East, the fact that the West is being challenged by a bunch of ragtag pirates in the Red Sea is totally insane. The West is somehow hand-wringing over a democratic ally, Israel, trying to destroy a terrorist group, Hamas, that just committed the worst act of murdering Jews since World War II. “What do we do? What do we do? How far should the Israelis go?”
China’s watching all that, and they can see it: That is a West in retreat.
ABC News reported on Sunday:
U.S. Navy helicopters returned fire and sank three small boats carrying Houthi militants in the Red Sea on Sunday, after U.S. warships responded to a distress call from a merchant vessel, military officials said. A Maersk container ship, the Singapore-flagged Hangzhou, issued a distress call at about 6:30 a.m. local time, U.S. Central Command said in a statement on Sunday. The merchant vessel said four small boats were attacking it. … Helicopters from two U.S. ships — the USS Eisenhower and the USS Gravely — responded and issued verbal calls to the small boats, U.S. officials said.
Remember, the Biden administration delisted the Houthis as a terrorist group when they came into power.
And right now, U.S. military assets are basically sitting out there having to wait to blow up these tiny inflatables being driven by illiterate morons with badly programmed drones. It’s insane.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY WIRE APP
Meanwhile, Iran is upping the game. Iran’s Alborz warship has now entered the Red Sea.
What is the Biden administration doing? According to the Jerusalem Post, a U.S. aircraft carrier was being removed from this area.
As the challenges are being upped against shipping in the Red Sea, the U.S. is removing the USS Gerald Ford. Instead, it’s heading out of the Mediterranean Sea. To go where exactly? Where else is there? A massive sea problem that requires the help of this U.S. battleship? Why is the Ford leaving? No one exactly knows. So Iran is upping its aggressiveness in this area.
China is looking on and thinking to itself, Man, we’re fools if given our current economic situation, we don’t make a move for Taiwan again. All of this could easily be the predicate to the idea that the Chinese window is closing and they need to move—and they need to move right now.
With Joe Biden as president, don’t be surprised if a lot of the hot spots around the globe start to heat up even more.