USA cannot abandon Europe because that allows Russia to absorb it. USA must retreat but retreat to North America is too much, too fast. USA optimal strategy will be to keep Europe divided and hostile towards Russia. My prediction is that USA will: a) allow Russia to sell pipeline oil/gas to the Balkan states (pkus Slovakia and Hungary) so these are kept favorable to Russia; b) prohibit Russia from selling pipeline oil/gas to Poland and Germany, so these are prevented from getting too dependent on Russia; c) continued slow boil wars in the front line states (Ukraine, Baltics, Finland) so there is tension between states receiving Russian pipeline oil/gas and everyone else in EU.
USA also cannot retreat from mideast or Africa because that is where the resources are. But USA can and will switch from Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean focus to making Mediterranean a NATO only sea, with Israel guarding the west end. North African states which refuse to be NATO vassals will be destroyed like Libya. Algeria will be given ample warning before this happens, of course.
Colombia and Venezuela are necessarily part of the North American fortress, because they allow access to the Caribbean Sea, which is otherwise guarded by the island chain. Locking the Gulf of Mexico/'Merica and Caribbean from possible submarine predators is important, plus Venezuela has valuable resources. Extending south beyond Colombia and Venezuela is indeed a step too far. Stares further south will be allowed neutrality and right to trade with both sides, same as in WWI and WWII.
Trump's recent blustering with Canada, Mexico, Panama, Colombia, Denmark/Greenland, followed by trivial concessions, should not be seen as incompetent negotiating skills, just as a warning shot fired overhead is not incompetent shooting skills. Sec State Rubio's multipolarity statement plus Trump's blustering is telling the world that USA is going back to sphere of influence thinking and is ready to control its sphere of influence with old-skool gunboat diplomacy.
Big retreat will be from the west Pacific. USA will likely put huge trade barriers in place to force factories to be relocated to the North American fortress, versus relying on vulnerable sea transport. Biden administration was already pushing to get TSMC to put a fab in the USA. I expect lots more such pressure in the future on South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, China. Eventual rule will be: invest in North American factories if you want to sell to North America, though initially push will be for USA factories, to satisfy USA voters. North America is more military issue than working age voter issue.
I greatly appreciate your thoughts. I've been thinking about this and will have to turn it into a post.
If we accept the premise of a Greater America nominally ending at the Panama Canal, then Venezuela is key and I'm a little surprised hasn't already invaded it! If Russia and China were smart they would already be reinforcing its defenses. I think South America will be a bit of grey area where battles are fought between the two blocks (Greater USA versus the multinodal world). It does make more sense for South America to trade with Asia than with the US, although America may want to tariff those products if at all possible.
So far in Europe, Musk is openly supporting the right wing parties that support economic integration with Russia. I think the US may just be interested in the Artic regions of Europe once a full fall-back is achieved. Maybe the US would hope that Russia-Europe would integrate and then break away from China, creating a tripartite global order?
Russia is developing a base in Benghazi and Algeria seems to be aligning with the BRICS. But you are right to point out the Mediterranean is important if the US must still service Israel.
I definitely agree on Trump not at all being incompetent in his negotiating skills! People underestimate him at their own risk. All those USAID militants never even suspected that DOGE was coming for them.
Africa is going to be tough for America. Russia and China are making strong inroads. The US does seem to be in a good position in The Congo at least.
I think the US will try to hold on to Japan and South Korea for as long as possible. The US military may not have enough industrial capacity to produce heavy volumes of highly technical weapons and may need South Korea and Japan to help. I have not heard of Trump threatening tariffs on them yet but with all the upheaval I may have missed it. It does seem
the US will cut Taiwan loose. I certainly agree that over time the US will reindustrialize more for military than political reasons, but in fact these go hand in hand.
Trump is already biting off an enormous amount to chew. Messaging that USA plans to pull back from west Pacific is more than even Trump dares. But reality is that USA Navy cannot possibly keep sea lanes open in west Pacific, and if it tries, Navy gets sunk in 1 day and USA humiliated. Without open sea lanes, Japan and South Korea run out of oil/gas very quickly. USA pullback will be messaged when USA fails to defend Taiwan. Until then, USA Navy just blusters and asks for more money. After the USA pullback from west Pacific, those Navy ships and Marine expeditionary forces can be used to discipline Algeria and push Russians out of Benghazi and elsewhere in Africa. Russia will be as hesitant (and unable) to directly fight USA in Africa as USA is to directly fight Russia in Ukraine, Baltics, Finland, Moldova.
China in Africa might be another story eventually, however Chinese are just getting up to speed on projecting power. They will focus first on west Pacific, then maybe dip their toe into the water with a proxy war in east Africa, with Russian help and Iranian naval base assistance. But I suspect that is several decades into the future. Then again, things are changing fast, including climate, so China might move faster.
"The country slowly but surely abandoned production for financialization, trading real industry for speculation, tangible goods for abstractions."
US manufacturing is higher than it's ever been, as far as output. It's employment, in absolute terms, and global share, in relative terms, that have gone down
US manufacturing as a percentage of GDP is way down--from nearly 30% in 1950 to 10% today. In the 70's, a boy on a working class track graduating from high school would have plenty of permanent job offers on a salary that would provide for a house and family. Nowadays he is told he has to go to university and try to join the Professional Managerial Class and even if he accomplishes that will struggle to afford a house or family.
USA cannot abandon Europe because that allows Russia to absorb it. USA must retreat but retreat to North America is too much, too fast. USA optimal strategy will be to keep Europe divided and hostile towards Russia. My prediction is that USA will: a) allow Russia to sell pipeline oil/gas to the Balkan states (pkus Slovakia and Hungary) so these are kept favorable to Russia; b) prohibit Russia from selling pipeline oil/gas to Poland and Germany, so these are prevented from getting too dependent on Russia; c) continued slow boil wars in the front line states (Ukraine, Baltics, Finland) so there is tension between states receiving Russian pipeline oil/gas and everyone else in EU.
USA also cannot retreat from mideast or Africa because that is where the resources are. But USA can and will switch from Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean focus to making Mediterranean a NATO only sea, with Israel guarding the west end. North African states which refuse to be NATO vassals will be destroyed like Libya. Algeria will be given ample warning before this happens, of course.
Colombia and Venezuela are necessarily part of the North American fortress, because they allow access to the Caribbean Sea, which is otherwise guarded by the island chain. Locking the Gulf of Mexico/'Merica and Caribbean from possible submarine predators is important, plus Venezuela has valuable resources. Extending south beyond Colombia and Venezuela is indeed a step too far. Stares further south will be allowed neutrality and right to trade with both sides, same as in WWI and WWII.
Trump's recent blustering with Canada, Mexico, Panama, Colombia, Denmark/Greenland, followed by trivial concessions, should not be seen as incompetent negotiating skills, just as a warning shot fired overhead is not incompetent shooting skills. Sec State Rubio's multipolarity statement plus Trump's blustering is telling the world that USA is going back to sphere of influence thinking and is ready to control its sphere of influence with old-skool gunboat diplomacy.
Big retreat will be from the west Pacific. USA will likely put huge trade barriers in place to force factories to be relocated to the North American fortress, versus relying on vulnerable sea transport. Biden administration was already pushing to get TSMC to put a fab in the USA. I expect lots more such pressure in the future on South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, China. Eventual rule will be: invest in North American factories if you want to sell to North America, though initially push will be for USA factories, to satisfy USA voters. North America is more military issue than working age voter issue.
I greatly appreciate your thoughts. I've been thinking about this and will have to turn it into a post.
If we accept the premise of a Greater America nominally ending at the Panama Canal, then Venezuela is key and I'm a little surprised hasn't already invaded it! If Russia and China were smart they would already be reinforcing its defenses. I think South America will be a bit of grey area where battles are fought between the two blocks (Greater USA versus the multinodal world). It does make more sense for South America to trade with Asia than with the US, although America may want to tariff those products if at all possible.
So far in Europe, Musk is openly supporting the right wing parties that support economic integration with Russia. I think the US may just be interested in the Artic regions of Europe once a full fall-back is achieved. Maybe the US would hope that Russia-Europe would integrate and then break away from China, creating a tripartite global order?
Russia is developing a base in Benghazi and Algeria seems to be aligning with the BRICS. But you are right to point out the Mediterranean is important if the US must still service Israel.
I definitely agree on Trump not at all being incompetent in his negotiating skills! People underestimate him at their own risk. All those USAID militants never even suspected that DOGE was coming for them.
Africa is going to be tough for America. Russia and China are making strong inroads. The US does seem to be in a good position in The Congo at least.
I think the US will try to hold on to Japan and South Korea for as long as possible. The US military may not have enough industrial capacity to produce heavy volumes of highly technical weapons and may need South Korea and Japan to help. I have not heard of Trump threatening tariffs on them yet but with all the upheaval I may have missed it. It does seem
the US will cut Taiwan loose. I certainly agree that over time the US will reindustrialize more for military than political reasons, but in fact these go hand in hand.
Trump is already biting off an enormous amount to chew. Messaging that USA plans to pull back from west Pacific is more than even Trump dares. But reality is that USA Navy cannot possibly keep sea lanes open in west Pacific, and if it tries, Navy gets sunk in 1 day and USA humiliated. Without open sea lanes, Japan and South Korea run out of oil/gas very quickly. USA pullback will be messaged when USA fails to defend Taiwan. Until then, USA Navy just blusters and asks for more money. After the USA pullback from west Pacific, those Navy ships and Marine expeditionary forces can be used to discipline Algeria and push Russians out of Benghazi and elsewhere in Africa. Russia will be as hesitant (and unable) to directly fight USA in Africa as USA is to directly fight Russia in Ukraine, Baltics, Finland, Moldova.
China in Africa might be another story eventually, however Chinese are just getting up to speed on projecting power. They will focus first on west Pacific, then maybe dip their toe into the water with a proxy war in east Africa, with Russian help and Iranian naval base assistance. But I suspect that is several decades into the future. Then again, things are changing fast, including climate, so China might move faster.
"The country slowly but surely abandoned production for financialization, trading real industry for speculation, tangible goods for abstractions."
US manufacturing is higher than it's ever been, as far as output. It's employment, in absolute terms, and global share, in relative terms, that have gone down
US manufacturing as a percentage of GDP is way down--from nearly 30% in 1950 to 10% today. In the 70's, a boy on a working class track graduating from high school would have plenty of permanent job offers on a salary that would provide for a house and family. Nowadays he is told he has to go to university and try to join the Professional Managerial Class and even if he accomplishes that will struggle to afford a house or family.