A Sinking Empire Called America

Haaretz, Israel
A Sinking Empire Called America

By Leon Hadar

Translated By Hannah Stork



18 September 2013

Edited by Lau­rence Bouvard
Israel - Haaretz - Original Article (Hebrew)
Economists use the concept of “delayed recognition” to indicate the gap between the time when a change in the economic system occurs and the ability of consumers and companies to feel its impact. This concept is also relevant to international relations. Sometimes a long-term historical perspective is required to understand that the balance of global power has changed and that yesterday’s superpower has a more modest status today. For example, even though the British Empire failed miserably from an economic standpoint and became a military protectorate of the United States after World War II, commentators and decision-makers continued to treat Britain as a world power. Only after the Suez Crisis in 1956, when the United States forced Britain and France — another sinking empire — to give up their attempts to recover their hegemonic status in Egypt and in the Middle East, did it become clear that London was no longer the capital of an all-powerful empire.
The Syrian crisis of 2013 is also likely to be remembered as a turning point in which it becomes clear that the hegemonic status the United States enjoyed in the world and in the Middle East after the end of the Cold War no longer exists and that the unipolar balance of power has gradually become multipolar. Since the end of World War II, and especially since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Americans have felt that they can take upon themselves the role of the world’s policeman, and Israelis, who have learned to rely on the fact that America will always protect their ally in the Middle East, are struggling to adapt to this new reality.
From here springs the tendency to repress this reality and to seek alternative explanations for the undermining of the United States’ status in the Middle East and for the weakness the U.S. has shown in dealing with the Syrian crisis. From here also spring the attempts of the Israeli right and its neoconservative allies in Washington to criticize Barack Obama for unwillingness to use military power and his willingness to agree to arrangements offered by Russia. Serious arguments have been made regarding the inconsistency in the government’s diplomatic strategy, along with baseless accusations regarding Obama’s connections with the Muslim Brotherhood. In the fantasy promoted by these critics, Obama — even though he is responsible for killing Osama bin Laden and for daily American drone offensives against intended acts of terror — should be replaced by a kind of new version of Ronald Reagan who will prove to the world, and especially to Arabs and Muslims, exactly who is boss.