The Strong, the Weak and the End of American Exclusivity

In his book, History of the Peloponnesian War, Thucydides describes a dialogue between Athens and the island of Melos that said “the strong do what they can, the weak suffer what they must.”

Nonetheless, Hobbes said in his book the Leviathan “NATURE has made men so equal in the faculties of body and mind that, though there be found one man sometimes manifestly stronger in body or of quicker mind than another, yet when all is taken together, the difference between man and man is not so considerable as that one man can claim to himself any benefit which another may not claim as well. For as to the strength of body, the weakest has strength enough to kill the strongest, either by secret machination or by alliance with others that are in the same danger with himself.” Hobbes wasn’t refuting Thucydides but rather he was pointing out that even the weaker states have agency.

With hundreds of military bases around the world and a thirty trillion dollar economy, the US is a great power. During the Cold War, America and the Soviet Union were the two superpowers. After the fall of the Soviet Union, America entered a period where it became the unipower which was bound to change. With the expansion of BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, the new Mecca defense pact between Türkiye, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, or Canada's efforts to deepen its relationships with Europe and other middle powers, the world is shifting rapidly as nations not as powerful as the US are building new alternatives. It would be chauvinistic to say the US will always be the major world power.

Despite its recent behavior, America remains strong because of its allies which it is seemingly alienating through its policies. When it comes to Greenland, Danish public broadcaster DR reported that “Denmark prepared to sabotage Greenland’s air strips, using explosives and flew in blood supplies amid fears of a potential US invasion.” The United States is repeatedly and publicly being defined as unreliable. Benjamin Haddad, France's Minister for Europe said “we cannot leave the security of Europe in the hands of voters in Wisconsin every four years.” Unfortunately, the image of American leadership that emerged after the Second World War is under increasing strain. From its recent bombing of alleged drug boats off Venezuela, the subsequent takeover of Venezuela oil sector, the war in Iran, to reports that Alberta Canada separatists held meetings with U.S. officials, and its support for Israel in Gaza, many people are beginning to see America in a different light.

The actions of America do not absolve other nations from their actions. In Ukraine, Russia has offered changing and overlapping justifications for its actions in Ukraine, including claims about NATO expansion, the protection of Russian speakers, the status of Crimea, and, after 2022, the claimed need to 'denazify' and 'demilitarize' Ukraine. In May 2002, however, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s public position was considerably different. In remarks concerning NATO expansion and Ukraine, he said that “as for NATO expansion, you know our position on this issue, it remains unchanged. Ukraine is a sovereign state and has the right to choose its own path to ensure its security, I do not see anything special here or anything that could overshadow the relations between Russia and Ukraine.” Whatever Russia's later objections to NATO expansion, Putin's public position in 2002 demonstrates that Moscow's argument evolved substantially over the following two decades. China has also used coercive power abroad and faced international criticism over its treatment of Uyghurs in Xinjiang and its policies toward Hong Kong.

As the rules based world order crafted by the United States seems to be collapsing, new power centers and alignments are being formed. Some of these alignments such as ASEAN have been around for a while but are now rethinking the geopolitical world and how they will relate to it. Nations are looking to hedge their bets. The US is convinced of its own strength and belief that it doesn’t need allies. Relations with Canada and Mexico have deteriorated, while disagreements with European and Asian allies have raised questions about the durability of America's traditional alliance system. Even Saudi Arabia, a longstanding American security partner, has increasingly questioned how far Washington's security guarantees extend.

More nations are talking about a multi-polar world which is supported by BRICS, China, Russia, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and numerous nations in the global south. America must understand that the reason for their support is its potential to end American dominance.

Former President Bill Clinton said “America has two choices. We can either use our great power to try to stay top dog on the global block in perpetuity, or we can seek to use that power to create a world in which we are comfortable living when we are no longer top dog.”

The United States will remain a formidable power for the foreseeable future. The question is whether its influence will decline as other centers of power grow. American policymakers must begin to recognize that military supremacy alone cannot preserve international leadership.

America is not becoming weak but American power is becoming less exclusive. Other nations are building alternatives, alliances are becoming more autonomous, and the willingness of other countries to accept American leadership can no longer be assumed. The question for Washington is how does it operate in a world where American dominance is no longer guaranteed.

Thucydides understood the power of the strong. Hobbes understood something important as well: the weak are not necessarily powerless. They have the agency to cooperate, resist, form alliances and develop their own sources of strength. America may remain the top dog but the world around it may be learning how to hunt without waiting for the dog to lead the pack.