President Donald Trump put in Israel's war in confusing analysts who used to the United States as a guarantor of peace and war fighter worldwide.
From their traditional point of view, allowing Israel to launch an attack that implicates the United States and leaves us responsible for ensuring its success and addressing any repercussions.
Trump's alliance, divided between supporters of Israel and the opponents of any American tangle in foreign conflicts, must face a dangerous incision.
But the days of the United States heading the “liberal world order” have ended.
What we see now is the discourse – and wisdom – from “America first” becomes a reality in the sky above Tehran.
The liberal global regime promoters believe that the United States can control events all over the world. They were excited to take over the burden of security for our allies, because with this responsibility the right to dictate the foreign policy of the allies came.
Other countries, who accept their status as clients in exchange for the American Defense Promise, can be prevented from taking any action It requires American defense.
Since the customer stipulates any independent capacity of their own, they will not have the ability to act independently – and therefore no choice but to postpone the demands.
The first foreign policy in America is once returned rights and The responsibilities confirmed by the United States.
Both should happen together: it will not make sense to announce that the United States will not roam everyone's defense, but everyone still has to do what the United States wants.
We will not have any moral claim for such a situation (why should the countries listen to us if we do not demand their security burdens?) No way to enforce them (or what?).
But the key is that the request is no longer necessary. If the United States is not on the hooks of repercussions from the action taken by another country, you do not have to worry much about work.
The “liberal world order” thesis has always been to deal with Israel. Yes, the Jewish state benefits greatly from American military assistance – but it has never requested that we bear the basic responsibility for its security, or to rely on us to do so.
On the contrary, Israel has always insisted on maintaining independent ability to protect and advance its interests, and generally refused to spread American military personnel in its conflicts.
A rational observer may look at this situation and think, Now there is a real ally.
But if your concept of “coalition” means other countries that hand over their rights and responsibilities to the United States, this leads you to walnut. An ally, through this thinking, is a person who does what we say to them.
The Israelis did not get this memorandum. Their freedom of work – in the Middle East in which the United States felt that it was obligated to insurance, because it was obligated to secure the entire world – a continuous headache.
But from the first perspective of America, while reducing the rights and responsibilities of the United States, there is no problem: each of the neo -conservatives eager to see Israel takes the battle to Iran, and restricts keen on the US vision that retracts foreign conflicts, can chant the current developments.
As a natural result of this and different framework, the United States has a much better chance to stay away from conflicts as it does not want to participate.
The idea that Iran can respond or should respond to an Israeli attack by comfortably attacking the United States in the internal logic of American domination, but it does not make sense when Israel launches its own attack.
It can eventually be in our interest to enhance a world where countries that generally correspond to our values are with our ability to act more decisively with less participation from us.
Certainly, this is the case here, just as if Germany was able to help Ukraine to restore the Russians or if Japan was able to defend Taiwan.
The first axis of America bears a necessity – the American force is no longer sufficient to maintain global hegemony, even if it is desirable.
But it also bears a different understanding, and perhaps more healthy, what American interests are really and the best way to reinforce them.
America does not first require the United States to continue its own interests and pressure the rest of the world to follow these same interests.
Instead, he realizes that the United States will follow its own interests – and that it can do it better by leaving its allies to follow their own interests as well.
It is recognized that this may be less enjoyable for Grandmasters who enjoyed the transfer of chess pieces around the plate. Forgive the chess cut for better admiration.
Orine Cas is the chief economist in American Compass. Adapted from the alternative understanding of America.
