Does Washington increase the reward for dependency?

The endeavors of a great power when it does not wish to have a competitor, is characterized by the desire to maintain prestige and lead the world. It seems that the United States is still dreaming of the other parties' recognition of the objective data on the distribution of power, which no longer has any effect in reality. Will the recognition be clearer after the recent events? Can America put more pressure on its allies to push them to acquiesce in its desires and meet its aspirations, as has been the case for more than two decades, after the pressures caused by the existence of a second pole have disappeared?

The struggle for influence in its political, economic and strategic manifestations may drag the competitors into war, with what constitutes the height of the contradiction between states and interest groups. And the US military-industrial complex cannot be a champion of peace, and it controls the attitudes of politicians inside the White House. It is in the interests of the influential there with stakeholders that there will always be hotbeds of tension for the export of arms, reviving the economy and realizing factional benefits, at the expense of the values ​​of the American Constitution and the principles of democracy and human rights.

And Eisenhower's warnings in the closing speech of his presidential term, after a full decade of the Cold War against the Soviet Union, had an important forward-looking dimension, and he included a clear warning of the influence of industrial complexes on American policy, when he said: "In the wheels of government, we must resist against the growing influence for the military-industrial complex. The threat of a catastrophic rise exists and will continue. We must not let this threaten our freedoms and our democratic path. We must not take anything for granted. Only through vigilant and conscious citizens can we confront military-industrial complexes and defense companies, with peaceful tools, so that security and freedom remain companions.” More likely, there will be a reluctance to run after the great power.

When the pole opposite to it disappeared after 1991, the date of the end of the Soviet Union, the United States of America increased control over the world, and imposed its dictates as it wanted. Since then, she has come to see the powers of the second rank and their maneuvers to obtain prestige as a real challenge. She met this with less patience than she had shown her, during the bipolar era. On the other hand, the reward that is paid in return for dependency has increased, albeit symbolically. So what is Washington doing today, as it pursues Putin with symbolic sanctions that have no effect in reality to save its face? It seems that it can no longer raise the reward of dependency even to the countries that are traditionally allied to it, and perhaps the handling of Pakistan and India, as well as Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi and Egypt with the Russian-Ukrainian crisis, and their failure to go along with the West to condemn Moscow, and entrench itself in its axis as usual, is in itself a prominent variable In international relations, suggests new balances. All of these are indicators that can conclude that the structure of the global system has become based on multipolarity, and that there is no longer a single power distinguished by exceptional political, economic, military and technological capabilities. What the US administration cannot hide is that for years it has been suffering from the burden of reconciling the requirements of leading the world order with its obligations at home, a matter that was exacerbated by the policy disappointments of its previous administrations. The diplomatic, psychological, and economic war between Russia and the West in general, in general, predicts that what resulted from the disappearance of the conditions dictated by the bipolar world of escalation of competition still exists, and may become more intense with the passage of days. There are those who are not yet satisfied with the multipolarity, or the emergence of signs in the international balance, and may lose the compass in the context of his search for dependence and loyalty of allies, so he calls heads of state in inappropriate terms suggesting a loss of balance. And if he does not succeed in this, what everyone does not wish may happen, which is the madness of confrontation and clashing between those who have been racing for years in the development of strategic weapons. New versions of the Cold War with its financial, diplomatic and commercial face, in search of more hegemony and obtaining strategic gains. And the confrontation taking place now constitutes the essence of the geopolitical difference between competing countries, and what it means is the rejection of the existence of a single center of power that is completely superior, and Moscow and Beijing clearly refuse, that this center continues to secure its interests unilaterally and selfishly at the expense of the rest of the countries. This world, which has lost its shores, is in dire need today to form an international legal base, with the aim of regulating ways of coexistence, and this may be by reviving the authority of the United Nations in a way that guarantees the implementation of international law, bypassing the stage of the transformation of UN agencies into tools in the hands of certain countries that justify illegal measures Taken by strong alliances to legitimize war, as happened on many occasions, it left a trail of destruction for peoples and sovereign states. It is in everyone's interest that the manifestations of violence be reduced, the advocates of war be restrained, and their mouths shut up. They should take a look at the last century, which in turn represented an era of economic and political volatility, as various nations were torn apart, between uneven economic progress and deterioration. A century was poisoned by the idea of ​​the difficulty of coexistence between different races, even if this issue is linked to the madness of the global market, which does not take into account human humanity, environmental protection and social justice, and whose financial arms are controlled in the fields of communications, satellite channels, information, medicines, scientific research, advertising and public relations. In all, they are obstacles that prevent all structures and institutions from carrying out their supposed roles. We notice how the international media these days are clearly submissive to the American Western camp, pushing towards psychological warfare and misleading public opinion.

In sum, it is natural for the aggressive tendency among the major powers to contribute to the insecurity at all regional and international levels. It is likely that the global political system will remain less stable in light of the entry of most countries, east and west, into blocs and economic and security alliances similar to the stage of the Cold War. However, it is not impossible to achieve peaceful cooperation between competing states.