I ask the kind reader's indulgence to reuse the exact title I previously employed in this space on December 23, 2009. At that time, speaking of the "perplexity" of a superpower like the United States was considered a form of intellectual recklessness, especially given the well-known wealth of intellect generated by institutions dedicated to preserving the global status that rendered Washington a sole superpower after the end of the Cold War. We were still in the first decade of the 21s century, two decades after the fall of the Soviet Union and Fukuyama’s prophecy of the "End of History" at the American stage of liberal democratic state ideals.
"Globalization" became an approach linking the human race to a planet whose outlook on the universe was rendered tangible through unprecedented technological forms. Although the dawn of the new millennium witnessed the first signs of the "Clash of Civilizations" when the September 11, 2001, attacks took place, the American response in Afghanistan and then Iraq revealed a certain lack of wisdom within the United States' policymaking.
Over the course of a quarter-century, four leaders alternated in steering the United States: George W. Bush for two consecutive terms, Barack Obama likewise for two terms, Donald Trump for a first term interrupted by Joe Biden’s single term, until Trump returned once again.
The focus on leadership here is because the "individual" and their ideologies have come to play central roles in strategic decisions regarding the management of international relations, including decisions of war and peace. At the start of the third millennium, the US president was not leading the United States alone; alongside and around him was the "Neoconservative" camp, whose slogan was for the 21st century to be an American century, just as the 20th had been.
All elements of American power attested that "globalization" had become an open global system for innovation, communication, and openness, revolving in various ways around Washington. The collapse of the World Trade Center in New York on September 11 was enough to make the elite surrounding the president lose their bearings, leading to the consecutive decisions to invade Afghanistan and then Iraq. Reshaping and molding political systems became an end in itself; ignoring the capacity of nations and peoples to shape themselves through genuine organic development drove negative, and in many cases, catastrophic outcomes. The eruption of the so-called "Arab Spring" was fueled by the "creative chaos" once spoken of by Condoleezza Rice, the US Secretary of State at the time.
The situation back then was not much different from what is happening these days under Trump’s leadership. Here, the simplicity once held by the Neoconservatives, who believed that America must lead and the world would follow, grows more complicated. In their view, Washington should never have to ask anyone's permission for its actions; as long as it foots the political bill, those who do not pay should keep their advice to themselves.
It was not known at the time whether any of these actors actually possessed viable solutions to the dilemmas and intricacies of international relations, including untangling the Middle Eastern "dilemma", which has remained untouched since the "Clinton understandings" before he left the stage.
Then came Obama, riding a wave of European, Asian and broad global admiration unseen for an American president since John F. Kennedy. Yet, this admiration did not grant the new president winning cards, even after he explicitly declared that the US could no longer act alone and indeed, that no one could lead the world without cooperating with others.
There was much of that classic American idealism in his approach, which inadvertently opened the door to a crude form of "realism" that arrived with the first Trump administration. That term ultimately culminated in a clash with Congress, the sidelining of institutions leading the fight against COVID-19, and accusations of election rigging levied against American institutions - an act that compromised the legitimacy of the American system in the eyes of the public and new American generations.
The inherent tension between these two pillars of thought - idealism and realism - within the American intellectual apparatus is precisely what led to the election of Biden, followed immediately by the return of Trump. The profound perplexity felt by both American public opinion and the global community when dealing with the US has triggered a severe intellectual upheaval within the country. This uncertainty has manifested itself most forcefully in how Washington deals with the Middle East.
Resolving the Middle Eastern "dilemma" became an impossible task, given a US that is deeply torn between its strategic interests across Arab nations and, at the same time, its absolute inability to distinguish between Israel as a state defined by the UN Partition Plan, and the imperialist Israeli impulse bent on expanding territory while subjugating the Palestinians. The spectacle of the current war in the region is a direct consequence of both regional frailty in managing its own affairs peacefully, and a weakened US unable to handle it effectively.
