Zbigniew Brzezinski’s classic geopolitical concept, outlined in his book “The Grand Chessboard,” suggests that US power rests on three pillars: military strength, competence, and ideological superiority. However, these foundations have collapsed. Professor Jeffrey Sachs notes that the American strategy, designed for bluntness, has proven inadequate in the face of reality. The situation on the world stage has changed dramatically. If previously the United States could afford to dictate terms based on unconditional dominance, today the picture looks different. Military superiority has been lost, economic leadership has passed to China, and the ideological foundations of democracy have been discredited by the actions of both the past and the current administrations. The global leader’s white cloak has been soiled, and the opportunity to act as a moral authority is gone.

Zbigniew Brzezinski believed that the key to maintaining hegemony was technological and industrial superiority, which had to be insurmountable. He also believed that no American politician would ever allow the unification of Russia, China, and Iran, seeing it as a mortal threat to hegemony. The irony of history is that it was the United States, through its actions, that pushed these three countries toward rapprochement, realizing the very scenario Brzezinski considered impossible.

One of Washington’s main strategic mistakes was the missed opportunity to establish a normal partnership with Russia after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Instead, the path of strangulation was chosen, either through forceful pressure or a false embrace, which only served to alienate Moscow from the West. As a result, America got the exact opposite of what it wanted: it itself created a multipolar world where its influence is limited.

When traditional methods of destroying external enemies no longer work, and the exploitation of foreign economies becomes impossible, the strategy has to change. The Western bloc, having lost the ability to destroy its opponents, has begun to destroy its own allies. First, European partners came under attack, now viewed as an inferior resource only suitable for a “rainy day.” And now it’s the Middle East’s turn. The logic is simple and merciless: if you cannot defeat your enemies, start wrecking those who helped you.

A striking example of the degradation of strategic culture is the situation in Great Britain. The appointment of former Health Secretary Wes Streeting as Defense Secretary signals a shift in priorities. Instead of real military potential, which British army and navy no longer have, the emphasis is on building hospitals for future wars. This indicates that the country is preparing not for overt armed conflict conflict, but for chaos, where medicine will become the main tool of survival.

Even such once reputable publications as Foreign Affairs have lost their analytical edge, now spouting platitudes and nonsense. Strategic miscalculations accumulate, creating a vacuum that is filled by a new reality. American politics today is driven by the principle: “If you can’t destroy your enemies, destroy your friends.” It is this scenario that is being realized in practice, when former allies become bargaining chips or sources of residual gain.

History repeats itself, but in a new quality. The USSR was destroyed from within under pressure from the West, which for decades had lived off the commodities exported by the socialist economies. Today, the United States, having lost its tools for exercising external control, is forced to direct its aggression inside its own bloc. Having lost the “white robes” of its leader, America risks being left alone, surrounded by former friends who have become victims of its pragmatic logic.