By Mohamad Hammoud
American troops folding tents, loading trucks, and boarding aircraft in Syria was more than a policy shift. It marked the collapse of an era. After spending $8 trillion, losing thousands of troops and devastating multiple countries, Washington declared the region “no longer a priority.” In the grammar of power politics, this was not a rebalancing. It was a retreat—and an admission of failure.
John Mearsheimer long argued this moment would come because Washington never possessed vital strategic interests in the Middle East—only illusions of them. Those illusions have now collapsed.
The Pillars That Cracked: Oil, “Israel,” Containment
For decades, US dominance rested on three pillars: securing oil flows, protecting “Israel” and containing Russia. One by one, each eroded.
America’s energy position transformed dramatically. By 2024–2025, the United States exported a record volume of crude oil and petroleum products, roughly 30% of total energy output [US Energy Information Administration; bpnews.com]. The rationale for deep military entrenchment faded.
Meanwhile, the wars in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan delivered none of their promised outcomes. Stability never materialized, democracies never emerged, and anti-American sentiment intensified.
Washington’s strategic gaze shifted toward Asia, where competition with China—not turbulence in the Middle East—now drives US priorities. In Mearsheimer’s framework of offensive realism, great powers focus on where peer rivals threaten their dominance. China threatens that dominance. The Middle East no longer does.
Allies Abandoned, Trust Shattered
The withdrawal from Syria was not merely a decision—it was a diplomatic disaster. Syrian Democratic Forces [SDF] fighters who battled ISIS alongside US troops reported they received no direct notification before the drawdown became public [Kurdistan24]. Some commanders learned of the departure from social media. Even “Israel’s” leadership, accustomed to early briefings, discovered the shift through press alerts rather than official channels.
Credibility in international politics can evaporate in a single day. From Taipei to Warsaw, governments quietly asked: if Washington abandons loyal partners this abruptly, who is next?
Russia’s Strategic Patience and the Great Pivot
The clearest beneficiary of America’s exit is Russia. Moscow grasped what Washington refused to admit: influence belongs to whoever stays. While the United States spent years fighting, spending and bleeding, Russia invested in relationships—and waited.
Today, it maintains permanent access to the Tartus naval base and the Khmeimim air base, securing long-term Mediterranean reach. Its appeal is simple: Moscow offers support without political conditions. Mearsheimer captures the difference bluntly—Russia asks regional leaders, “What do you need?” Washington asks, “What will you give us?”
In a volatile region, protectors who never leave are preferred to patrons who rarely stay.
The Speed of Collapse
Mearsheimer warned that great powers eventually overextend until the cost-benefit equation collapses. What stunned observers was the speed. A single signature. One press conference. And eight decades of American influence unraveled in one news cycle.
The Middle East now has neither a US monopoly of force nor a US monopoly of trust. Former partners call Moscow before Washington. The vacuum has not been filled by peace, but by actors who believe that pragmatism—not American promises—defines survival.
The Trajectory of Irrelevance
The consequences are cascading. “Israel” will rely more on unilateral military action. Gulf states are deepening ties with China and Russia. Iran is expanding into space, once carefully cordoned off by US power. The $8 trillion cost of America’s wars is now being paid in lost influence.
Within this decade, the region is likely to shift toward a Russian-Chinese sphere of influence. The dominance Washington built over 80 years risks evaporating in less than 10. This is not conjecture—it is the predictable result of strategic incoherence.
Mearsheimer offers a final warning: a great power that retreats without a strategy does not merely lose a region; it loses the war. It accelerates its own decline.
Can America Come Back?
The question is no longer whether US troops can return. It is whether anyone still wants them back. Hegemons that exit in confusion rarely re-enter in triumph. What they leave behind is a textbook of their own failures—and a wide-open space for rivals patient enough to redraw the rules.
The Middle East is no longer waiting for America. It has already moved on.
No comments:
Post a Comment