The Post-American Order Starts in Riyadh and Islamabad

Hedging and multipolar tactical relations is by definition a post-America relationship, and is a result of the relative (not absolute) decline in American power.

America was able to be the sole hyperpower in the 1990s and 2000s because we were the largest economy in PPP by far in 2000 [0] with 20% of global GDP PPP and with no near competitor. In 2025, we are now at 14% of global GDP PPP [1] and outcompeted by China. And in the 2030s, the US's share of GDP PPP will converge with India's [2]

Mind you, GDP and especially GDP PPP is basically a function of production based on relative value, and China+India are seeing this growth due to a large population size along with generational reforms from the 1970s-1980s and 1990s-2000s respectively finally starting to pay off, but there is no way to deny that middle powers can now make their own economic and defense alliances independent of the "West" or "China", and will increasingly make their own poles.

For example, the fact that the newly constructed Dangote Refinery - Africa's largest refinery, and 6th largest in the world and larger than any refinery owned or operated by an American company - is built and operated by an Indian SOE [3] highlights how an entire region (West Africa) that has historically been dependent on American refining capacity from Chevron despite being a major oil producer is now working with a non-western country to remove that reliance. A Nigeria+India story, a Cambodia+China story, a Angola+Brazil story, a Vietnam+Russia story, and others are developing out of relative convergence of interests.

This is not a stable world. This means that regional conflicts can cause contagion in other conflicts in the world.

For example, the Russia-Ukraine War now pulling the South Korea, North Korea, and Japan into the conflict. Or the Thailand-Cambodia conflict, where neither the US nor China knew how to respond because it would alienate either Thailand or Cambodia to align with either the US or China.

[0] - https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/PPPSH@WEO/OEMDC/ADVE...

[1] - https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/PPPSH@WEO/OEMDC/ADVE...

[2] - https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/PPPSH@WEO/OEMDC/ADVE...

[3] - https://engineersindia.com/dangote-refinery-and-petrochemica...

That's patently false. The Gulf States have been aligned with the US for almost 90 years now.

The US's intervention in Iraq to protect Kuwait in 1991, to overthrow Saddam Hussein in 2004 (the way Kim Jong Un is lampooned in American media is how Saddam is still lampooned in Saudi media [0]), our backing of Saudi-aligned Hariri in Lebanon, and various other foreign policy interventions and alignments in Western Asia were aligned with the Gulf States and vice versa.

The difference is,

1. Obama and later Biden decided to cut off American support for the Saudi war against the Houthis in Yemen

2. Trump was "convinced" by Rex Tillerson to stop Saudi and the UAE from invading Qatar and hoisting the Thani family with a construction crane.

This convinced all the Gulf States that US foreign policy can no longer be trusted, and they need to be like Qatar and build their own alliances with regional powers.

[0] - https://www.facebook.com/masameer/videos/%D9%83%D9%8A%D9%81-...

While Russia is a paper tiger and it's military kit (mostly) second rate, China and India both now have a very large market for energy as well as a developing defence sector making modern kit (especially China).

Now we have the United States essentially throwing a hissy fit against everybody for every (perceived or real) "unfair" trade relationship now that they may actually need to compete again (while turning its back on it's one major superpower, the fact that it is/was a magnet for immigrants).

I do agree that the west, and especially America, can suffer from a fundamental misunderstanding of other country's origins, culture, and governments. This is especially true of right-leaning political leaders who think everybody wants to be like the United States (which made those in the Bush Administration think Iraq would welcome them and misreading Saddam's vague statements about WMDs being more about derring Iran). "The west" has had a 2-300 year run at the top and that's made us complacent, I think.

(On a side note, it still remains to be seen how well China will fare in the medium to long term - centralization of power usually ends up meaning little problems fester into larger ones far more than more open societies where criticism can mean earlier awareness to deal with them...)