Why the United States Cannot Regain Its Position

Arms, Debt and Decline

(Research Image: Ehsan Soltani)

The United States has moved away from its founding political structure. The system no longer reflects a functioning republic. Decision-making is concentrated in the hands of a narrow class. Economic policy is driven by credit and consumption rather than production. Military strategy relies on legacy systems that no longer hold the advantage they once did. The government operates through pressure abroad and debt at home. The gap between stated ideals and actual outcomes has widened. What remains is a framework sustained by habit and not capability.

Since the end of the Cold War, American power has been directed outward in search of new theatres of control. The result has been financialisation, deindustrialisation, and war. American manufacturing declined, and what remained of its productive class was discarded. This destruction was no accident at all. The country was captured gangsters, real life mafia cartels. Capital was moved offshore, leaving the working class to decline under the weight of debt, drugs, and social breakdown. In place of tangible value, a consumption economy was pushed. Credit cards, mortgages, gadgets, and military contracts filled the gap.

The United States Navy still attempts to secure global shipping lanes, but the ships it protects are largely delivering goods made elsewhere. Most items on American shelves are produced in Asia. The country has kept its dominance not by producing, but by printing and enforcing the value of its currency through military presence, overt and covert threats, as well as ponzi scheme based financial leverage. That strategy, the biggest scam in history, has been exposed for what it is, and is now under pressure.

The Ukraine conflict revealed how much has changed. The idea that Ukraine could win was never serious. NATO overestimated its capabilities and underestimated the consequences of challenging a peer power. The arms provided to Ukraine were fragmented, difficult to integrate, and in many cases ineffective against modern defences. The West fought with weapons designed for older wars and met systems it could not match. Ukraine became a proving ground for NATO equipment. The results did not support the marketing.

Donald Trump has changed his position several times on Ukraine. He has spoken of peace while continuing to support arms transfers. He has claimed concern for Ukrainian lives while demanding more weapons be sent. He has issued public threats against Moscow and Beijing, and claimed that these threats kept both powers in check. The statements serve a political purpose but are detached from reality. The strategy was certainly not well thought, having been based on policy papers of the cold war era. Whatever they have attempted, whether to deter, to persuade, or to shape outcomes, has failed in each case, as deterrence did not hold, diplomacy was undermined by the very statements meant to support it, and the result has only deepened the collapse of credibility.

Russia’s goal has not changed. It seeks the demilitarisation of NATO and the denazification of Ukraiine. That effort is ongoing. The West cannot match Russian production rates or operational depth. The United States lacks the industrial base to replace what has been lost. Even Britain, once a leading naval power, cannot get its submarines to sea. Its frigate programme is delayed, the defence industry is fragmented, and its workforce reduced. In Germany, their tanks have proved useless in Ukraine, and talk of escalation continues. Yet Germany lacks the capacity to produce modern systems at scale. Rebuilding would take years, if it is possible at all. I mean, NATO is 34 countries, yes, 34 fighting one country, and they cannot defeat Russia.

The military imbalance, so apparent, is now generational. Western systems are behind in development and deployment. Legacy platforms are being upgraded, and not being replaced. Even if budgets are raised, the manpower and infrastructure are not in place. Across NATO, the pattern is consistent, the member states rely on each other in ways that do not strengthen the alliance but instead reveal a system of mutual dependence with little productive output. I would call it parasitic, to be honest and frank here. Rather than each country contributing meaningful industrial or military capacity, most depend on external supply chains, shared resources, and political cover from larger powers. This has created a closed loop where burden-sharing is often rhetorical, real capability is scarce, and each state waits for others to carry the cost. The result is a lack of cooperation, and a network of dependencies that drains rather thanreinforces. Across the board, production lines are stalled, recruitment is down, and political will is spread thin.

At the political level, the rot is even deeper. Western elites no longer maintain credibility, it’s below zero. Leadership is marked by corruption, personal scandal, and disconnection from national interest. The Epstein scandal is one of many symptoms. The governing class is increasingly seen as self-serving and unaccountable. Foreign policy serves lobbyists and contractors before it serves voters. Sanctions are issued with little effect. Arms are sold without any reasonable bstrategy. Alliances are maintained even when they no longer serve national security.

Meanwhile, BRICS continues to expand, and countries like Indonesia, with large populations and growing economies, are joining. Trade in national currencies, being the ultimate goal of these countries, is increasing. Alternative financial systems are in progress and being linked. The goal is to reduce dependency on the dollar and bypass Western-controlled mechanisms. These shifts although gradual are being implemented. The West cannot reverse this process through pressure or incentives, this is will not work. Furthermore, the west has lost credibility and capacity.

Europe remains economically dependent on the United States. American weapons are being pushed into European markets as local industries collapse. F-35s, Patriot systems, and other platforms are sold regardless of effectiveness. This has become a hardwired policy. The European Union, as an economic extension of NATO, follows Washington’s line even when it goes against European interests. The cost of this is now visible in energy prices, deindustrialisation, and political backlash.

Germany, like others, continues to make threats it cannot back. Talk of war does not match capability. Russia has drawn its lines and has shown it can strike back. If escalation continues, European capitals will face consequences. Military parity no longer exists, and any serious conflict would expose this immediately. If the demonstration by Iran is anything to go by, Russia has more potent means.

The old Western order is clearly over, and the daily scenes in western capitals before our eyes, are a total joke. What remains is institutional drift, with systems no longer functioning as intended, public representation absent, and decisions made by groups whose interests are detached from national stability or long-term outcomes. Foreign policy is no longer strategic but reactive and staged, while credibility declines and whatever comes next is still taking shape in the absence of serious leadership.

The outcome will depend on whether political leadership can adjust to the reality it faces, rather than the illusions it still sells. The US empire has been in terminal decline for years, and it now faces a hard choice, adjust to changing global conditions by acting as a cooperative partner, or continue down the path of confrontation, which will only hasten its collapse.

Global GeoPolitics

If you think my voice should be heard louder then PLEASE support by becoming a paid subscriber. I have minimal overheads, no sponsors to sell myself or soul to, no bosses who tell me what to write (or NOT write), or staff I have to pay. I’m here for your raw, straight, and dedicated analyses. Your support is appreciated. Thank you.

buymeacoffee.com/ggtv