Skip to playerSkip to main content
John Mearsheimer argues that the world has moved from unipolarity to multipolarity, with the United States, China and Russia now operating as three great powers — fundamentally changing global strategy.

In this address, the renowned realist scholar explains why China, not Russia, poses the primary long-term challenge to U.S. power, and why Washington’s focus on Europe weakens its ability to contain Beijing in East Asia. Mearsheimer contends that Russia lacks the capability to dominate Europe and warns that maintaining a large U.S. military presence there drains resources needed elsewhere.

He also examines how America’s unique relationship with Israel shapes U.S. military commitments in the Middle East, further reducing Washington’s willingness to act as Europe’s security guarantor. According to Mearsheimer, NATO expansion and the push to bring Ukraine into the alliance were strategic mistakes that provoked a costly war and increased instability on the continent.

#nato #euparliament #apt

Category

🗞
News
Transcript
00:00The United States is no longer the only great power in the world.
00:06China and Russia are now great powers,
00:09which means that American policymakers have to think differently about the world around them.
00:17To understand what unipolarity means for Europe,
00:22it's essential to consider the distribution of power among the world's three great powers.
00:28The United States is still the most powerful country in the world,
00:33but China has been catching up and is now widely regarded as a peer competitor.
00:41Its huge population, coupled with its truly remarkable economic growth since the early 1990s,
00:51has turned it into a potential hegemon in East Asia.
00:56For the United States, which is already a regional hegemon in the Western Hemisphere,
01:04another great power achieving hegemony, either in East Asia or Europe,
01:12is a deeply worrisome prospect.
01:15Remember that the United States entered both world wars to prevent Germany and Japan
01:22from becoming regional hegemons in Europe and East Asia, respectively.
01:29The same logic applies today to China in East Asia.
01:35Russia is the weakest of the three great powers,
01:39and contrary to what many Europeans think,
01:43I'm sure many Europeans in this institution,
01:46it is not a threat to overrun all of Ukraine, much less Eastern Europe.
01:53After all, it has spent the past three and a half years
01:57just trying to conquer the eastern one-fifth of Ukraine.
02:03The Russian army is not the Wehrmacht,
02:06and Russia is not the Soviet Union during the Cold War,
02:12or the Chinese in East Asia today.
02:15In other words, Russia is not a potential hegemon in Europe.
02:22Given this distribution of power,
02:26there's a strategic imperative for the United States to focus on containing China
02:32and preventing it from dominating East Asia.
02:36There is no compelling strategic reason, however,
02:41for the United States to maintain a significant military presence in Europe,
02:47given that Russia is not a threat to become a European hegemon.
02:54Indeed, devoting defense resources to Europe
03:00reduces the resources available for East Asia.
03:05This basic logic explains the U.S. pivot to Asia.
03:12But if a country pivots to one region,
03:15it means that it's pivoting away from another region.
03:20And, of course, that other region that we're pivoting away from is Europe.
03:26There's another important dimension,
03:29which has little to do with the global balance of power,
03:32that further reduces the likelihood the U.S. will remain committed
03:37to maintaining a significant military presence in Europe.
03:42Specifically, the United States has a special relationship with Israel
03:47that has no parallel in recorded history.
03:51That connection, which is the result of the tremendous power of the Israel lobby
03:57inside the United States,
04:00not only means that the United States will support Israel unconditionally,
04:06but it also means that American forces will be involved in Israel's wars,
04:14either directly or indirectly.
04:18In short, the United States will continue to allocate substantial military resources to Israel,
04:27as well as commit substantial military forces of its own to the Middle East.
04:34This obligation to Israel creates an additional incentive to draw down U.S. forces in Europe
04:44and push European countries to provide for their own security.
04:50The bottom line is that powerful structural forces associated with the shift
04:57from unipolarity to unipolarity coupled with America's peculiar relationship with Israel
05:05have the potential to eliminate the U.S. pacifier from Europe and cripple NATO,
05:12which would obviously have serious negative consequences for European security.
05:19It is possible, however, to avoid an American exit,
05:25which is surely what almost every European leader desires.
05:31Simply put, achieving that outcome, i.e. preventing the United States from leaving Europe in a serious way,
05:41requires wise strategies and skillful diplomacy on both sides of the Atlantic.
05:49But that is not what we have gotten so far.
05:52Instead, Europe and the United States foolishly sought to bring Ukraine into NATO,
06:01which provoked a losing war with Russia that markedly increases the odds that the U.S. will depart Europe
06:11and NATO will be...
Be the first to comment
Add your comment

Recommended