6 ms·

The mark for the end of the British empire was said to have happen when they lost control of the Suez canal. Iran is testing if this is the end of the U.S hegem

The mark for the end of the British empire was said to have happen when they lost control of the Suez canal. Iran is testing if this is the end of the U.S hegemony.

sokoloff 3y ago
It seems extraordinarily unlikely that the inevitable fall of the US hegemony will be at the hands of present-day Iran.
- philwelch 3y ago
  The fall of US hegemony is much more likely going to be the result of the US government abdicating its responsibilities to the world than the result of some other hegemon materially overcoming the US. This is as good an opportunity as any for that to happen.
  - sokoloff 3y ago
    If that risk begins to materialize, there is more than sufficient strength among the allied western nations to ensure that the situation proceeds to the “find out” phase.
    - rasz 3y ago
      As it stands western NATO nations are too timid to shoot down an Iranian unmanned loitering munition fired by russia and flying across NATO country to bomb Odessa. According to dpa (German news agency): >russian drones violated Romanian (NATO ) airspace tonight. German interceptors approached the drones, “visually confirmed contact but have not received an order to destroy drones”. So the drones flew further towards Ukraine to kill Ukrainians. One drone exploded in @NATO airspace. https://news.yahoo.com/russian-drone-attack-ukraine-violates-132400471.html https://news.yahoo.com/russian-drone-attack-ukraine-violates... only NATO response was this pathetic: "The ministry strongly condemns the attacks by the Russian Federation on individual objects and elements of civilian infrastructure in Ukrainian ports on the Danube,” In case you think shooting it down would be bad here is some contrast from Turkey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Russian_Sukhoi_Su-24_shootdown https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Russian_Sukhoi_Su-24_shoo... russia understands only violence, nothing else matters.
  - jongjong 3y ago
    This makes it sound like the US is doing its 'allies' a service. I must be mistaken in thinking that the US has been wrecking a havoc in the middle east for its own benefit and then letting its allies in the EU deal with the resulting inflows of refugees. Or how the US monopolized the tech sector and didn't allow any of its allies to foster their own tech industry. Thanks so much USA. Thank you so much for oppressing us and corrupting our politicians. Sincerely, Your allies P.S. We're really going to miss this US-led world order because we love you guys so much! xoxo!
    - sokoloff 3y ago
      How did the US monopolize tech (other than by providing an economic backdrop where it could flourish without being strangled)? If another country doesn’t have a vibrant tech industry, it’s not obvious to me that the problem is something bad the US did.
    - nradov 3y ago
      Our European allies did a fine job of handicapping their own tech sector. They obviously don't consider it a strategic priority and aren't trying very hard. The US strategic pivot towards Asia is well underway. Now that we're effectively energy independent there's no longer an existential need to wreak havoc in the Middle East. Instead I expect the UK and France to resume wreaking havoc there as they did prior to Pax Americana. They don't really have another option to maintain critical fossil fuel supplies.
    - networkchad 3y ago
      [dead]
    - hackerlight 3y ago
      > We're really going to miss this US-led world order You will miss it. Just because it's bad doesn't mean the alternative is better. The alternative will be worse. Many of the reasons that deaths from conflicts is at a historic low is because of the US-led world order. This is regardless of which school of geopolitics you subscribe to. If you believe in democratic peace theory, or the liberalism idea that trade reduces conflict, or the realist idea that we have less war only because we're in a unipolar hegemony, the US-led world order has caused less conflict deaths. I don't have to downplay the atrocities and contradictions of the US and their allies when accepting this reality.
- wolverine876 3y ago
  I'm not sure about that. An invasion of Iran could cause significant budgetary and institutional harm, as well as destroying trust in the US's leadership position in the world and in the rules-based international order on which international US power depends. Iran would be the most powerful foe since WWII (perhaps not counting China's involvement in the Korean War, but afaik China's only power then was masses of soldiers). They are more wealthy, more populous, and more politically, economically, and militarily capable than Iraq and Afghanistan combined - possibly more than all foes since WWII combined. Geographically, they are mostly mountains, especially along their coast [0]. They have been preparing for generations to fight off the US. After Vietnam the US military was a mess for many years, arguably until the Gulf War. Also, weakness creates a negative reinforcement loop: When enemies and competitors see the US weakened or just consumed with a problem, they will make moves that worsen the US's situation. (Just look at this map of Iranian topography:) [0] https://www.glimpsefromtheglobe.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Iran.png https://www.glimpsefromtheglobe.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/...
  - pm90 3y ago
    Invasion isn’t required. The current regime has managed to survive and make strategic gains via proxies to emerge as a regional power despite crippling sanctions for decades. They are supplying drones to Russians. If they formalize a military-economic bloc with Russia and China, it would be a far more dangerous (but likely) outcome.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - nradov 3y ago
    There won't be any invasion. No one has any appetite for that. If a conflict with Iran comes it will be something like Operation Praying Mantis again plus strikes against key economic targets such as oil refineries. The Iranian navy and air force are largely defenseless against stand-off strikes. They would still be able to cause trouble by sponsoring terrorist groups, but all of their forces capable of projecting regional conventional power could be wrecked in a few weeks of sustained strikes. (I am not suggesting that this should be done. Obviously everyone should look for ways to deescalate the situation.)
creato 3y ago
The Suez canal is a trade route for Europe and Asia for the most part. If this is a test of US hegemony, if anything that is a reminder of just how much Europe and China rely on the US.
- sudosysgen 3y ago
  China has good enough relations with Iran that they aren't really going to be threatened durably here.
  - dessimus 3y ago
    No, China seems to have issues with transitting through the Suez canal all on their own.
    - sudosysgen 3y ago
      Do they? As far as I am aware, the Houthis/Iranians have never messed with Chinese vessels.
      - galdosdi 3y ago
        The OP is making an Evergrande Evergiven joke
        sudosysgen 3y ago
        The Evergiven was Taiwanese, not Chinese. Evergrande is a Chinese real estate company with financial troubles, which is unrelated to the Evergiven, unlike Evergreen, the Taiwanese company that owned and operated the Evergiven.
        galdosdi 3y ago
        Taiwan, China, same thing. Mainland China is just a renegade province of Taiwan and will be brought to heel sooner or later.

The mark for the end of the British empire was said to have happen when they lost control of the Suez canal. Iran is testing if this is the end of the U.S hegemony.

sokoloff 3y ago

It seems extraordinarily unlikely that the inevitable fall of the US hegemony will be at the hands of present-day Iran.

philwelch 3y ago
The fall of US hegemony is much more likely going to be the result of the US government abdicating its responsibilities to the world than the result of some other hegemon materially overcoming the US. This is as good an opportunity as any for that to happen.
- sokoloff 3y ago
  If that risk begins to materialize, there is more than sufficient strength among the allied western nations to ensure that the situation proceeds to the “find out” phase.
  - rasz 3y ago
    As it stands western NATO nations are too timid to shoot down an Iranian unmanned loitering munition fired by russia and flying across NATO country to bomb Odessa. According to dpa (German news agency): >russian drones violated Romanian (NATO ) airspace tonight. German interceptors approached the drones, “visually confirmed contact but have not received an order to destroy drones”. So the drones flew further towards Ukraine to kill Ukrainians. One drone exploded in @NATO airspace. https://news.yahoo.com/russian-drone-attack-ukraine-violates-132400471.html https://news.yahoo.com/russian-drone-attack-ukraine-violates... only NATO response was this pathetic: "The ministry strongly condemns the attacks by the Russian Federation on individual objects and elements of civilian infrastructure in Ukrainian ports on the Danube,” In case you think shooting it down would be bad here is some contrast from Turkey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Russian_Sukhoi_Su-24_shootdown https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Russian_Sukhoi_Su-24_shoo... russia understands only violence, nothing else matters.
- jongjong 3y ago
  This makes it sound like the US is doing its 'allies' a service. I must be mistaken in thinking that the US has been wrecking a havoc in the middle east for its own benefit and then letting its allies in the EU deal with the resulting inflows of refugees. Or how the US monopolized the tech sector and didn't allow any of its allies to foster their own tech industry. Thanks so much USA. Thank you so much for oppressing us and corrupting our politicians. Sincerely, Your allies P.S. We're really going to miss this US-led world order because we love you guys so much! xoxo!
  - sokoloff 3y ago
    How did the US monopolize tech (other than by providing an economic backdrop where it could flourish without being strangled)? If another country doesn’t have a vibrant tech industry, it’s not obvious to me that the problem is something bad the US did.
  - nradov 3y ago
    Our European allies did a fine job of handicapping their own tech sector. They obviously don't consider it a strategic priority and aren't trying very hard. The US strategic pivot towards Asia is well underway. Now that we're effectively energy independent there's no longer an existential need to wreak havoc in the Middle East. Instead I expect the UK and France to resume wreaking havoc there as they did prior to Pax Americana. They don't really have another option to maintain critical fossil fuel supplies.
  - networkchad 3y ago
    [dead]
  - hackerlight 3y ago
    > We're really going to miss this US-led world order You will miss it. Just because it's bad doesn't mean the alternative is better. The alternative will be worse. Many of the reasons that deaths from conflicts is at a historic low is because of the US-led world order. This is regardless of which school of geopolitics you subscribe to. If you believe in democratic peace theory, or the liberalism idea that trade reduces conflict, or the realist idea that we have less war only because we're in a unipolar hegemony, the US-led world order has caused less conflict deaths. I don't have to downplay the atrocities and contradictions of the US and their allies when accepting this reality.
wolverine876 3y ago
I'm not sure about that. An invasion of Iran could cause significant budgetary and institutional harm, as well as destroying trust in the US's leadership position in the world and in the rules-based international order on which international US power depends. Iran would be the most powerful foe since WWII (perhaps not counting China's involvement in the Korean War, but afaik China's only power then was masses of soldiers). They are more wealthy, more populous, and more politically, economically, and militarily capable than Iraq and Afghanistan combined - possibly more than all foes since WWII combined. Geographically, they are mostly mountains, especially along their coast [0]. They have been preparing for generations to fight off the US. After Vietnam the US military was a mess for many years, arguably until the Gulf War. Also, weakness creates a negative reinforcement loop: When enemies and competitors see the US weakened or just consumed with a problem, they will make moves that worsen the US's situation. (Just look at this map of Iranian topography:) [0] https://www.glimpsefromtheglobe.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Iran.png https://www.glimpsefromtheglobe.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/...
- pm90 3y ago
  Invasion isn’t required. The current regime has managed to survive and make strategic gains via proxies to emerge as a regional power despite crippling sanctions for decades. They are supplying drones to Russians. If they formalize a military-economic bloc with Russia and China, it would be a far more dangerous (but likely) outcome.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- nradov 3y ago
  There won't be any invasion. No one has any appetite for that. If a conflict with Iran comes it will be something like Operation Praying Mantis again plus strikes against key economic targets such as oil refineries. The Iranian navy and air force are largely defenseless against stand-off strikes. They would still be able to cause trouble by sponsoring terrorist groups, but all of their forces capable of projecting regional conventional power could be wrecked in a few weeks of sustained strikes. (I am not suggesting that this should be done. Obviously everyone should look for ways to deescalate the situation.)

creato 3y ago

The Suez canal is a trade route for Europe and Asia for the most part. If this is a test of US hegemony, if anything that is a reminder of just how much Europe and China rely on the US.

sudosysgen 3y ago
China has good enough relations with Iran that they aren't really going to be threatened durably here.
- dessimus 3y ago
  No, China seems to have issues with transitting through the Suez canal all on their own.
  - sudosysgen 3y ago
    Do they? As far as I am aware, the Houthis/Iranians have never messed with Chinese vessels.
    - galdosdi 3y ago
      The OP is making an Evergrande Evergiven joke
      - sudosysgen 3y ago
        The Evergiven was Taiwanese, not Chinese. Evergrande is a Chinese real estate company with financial troubles, which is unrelated to the Evergiven, unlike Evergreen, the Taiwanese company that owned and operated the Evergiven.
        galdosdi 3y ago
        Taiwan, China, same thing. Mainland China is just a renegade province of Taiwan and will be brought to heel sooner or later.