| Remember George Floyd? |
Part I: The Unstable Foundation –
America's Fractured Identity
The
United States is often described as a "nation of immigrants," but
this cheerful phrase obscures a more complicated reality. At just 250 years
old, America lacks the deep civilizational memory that anchors older societies.
It has no tribal beginnings, no shared mythology of origin beyond revolutionary
break from Britain, and few collective memories that bind all its peoples – Pearl
Harbor being a rare exception.
The
cultural foundations of the modern US were initially European, predominantly
English in language, institutions, and political thought. Waves of German,
Irish, Italian, and Polish immigrants added layers to this Anglo-Protestant
core. But two other histories complicate this narrative profoundly.
First,
the tragedy of Black slavery. From 1619, when enslaved Africans first arrived
in Virginia, through centuries of bondage, Civil War, Jim Crow segregation, and
the long struggle for civil rights, Black Americans have existed in a
paradoxical relationship with the nation they helped build. Today, at 13-14% of
the population, they have achieved remarkable gains – culminating in the Obama
presidency – yet movements like Black Lives Matter remind us how much remains
unresolved.
Second,
the Hispanic presence predates English settlement itself. Spanish colonies
flourished in the Southwest and Florida long before the Mayflower. After the
Mexican-American War (1846-1848), the US absorbed vast territories with
established Mexican communities. Later migrations from Cuba, Puerto Rico, and
the Dominican Republic added further diversity to this Hispanic foundation.
Then
came the Jews. Between 1880 and 1924, large numbers fled persecution in Eastern
Europe, settling in cities like New York and Chicago. Their emphasis on
literacy and education – rooted in religious traditions of study and
interpretation – propelled them into universities and professions. Ironically,
discrimination that barred them from elite institutions pushed Jewish
entrepreneurs into new industries like Hollywood and finance, which later
became enormously influential. Though only 2-3% of the population today,
American Jews command disproportionate economic and political power, alongside
stunning contributions to science and intellectual life.
Asian
Americans, particularly Chinese, faced recurring waves of exclusion. The
Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 was the first major law restricting immigration
based on race. Japanese internment during World War II revealed how quickly
suspicion could become policy. During the COVID-19 pandemic, anti-Asian hate
incidents surged again – and now, Asians find themselves once more targeted by
Trump's rhetoric.
Together,
these influences form a hybrid culture, yet the Anglo-Protestant tradition
remains the institutional framework. What this mélange lacks, however, is the
cohesive identity that older civilizations possess. The US is a melting pot
without collective memory, held together more by ideology than by shared
history. Into this vacuum stepped Donald Trump—a white supremacist at heart, a
crook in practice, and a leader who exploits every fracture for his own gain.
Part II: The Captive Leader – Trump's
Moral Bankruptcy
Donald
Trump will likely go down as the most morally bankrupt leader in American
history. The Jeffrey Epstein files, whatever their full contents, have already
painted a picture of decadence at the highest levels. Trump lies habitually,
surrounds himself with sycophants, and shows no regard for constitutional
constraints. He markets his own digital coin from the presidency, bullies
allies and adversaries alike, and flip-flops on decisions so frequently that
the word "policy" seems beyond his comprehension.
His
standing internationally, outside a dwindling circle of hardcore supporters
like Japan's Sanae Takaichi and NATO's Mark Rutte, is rock bottom. Even his own
appointees struggle to defend him – witness the pathetic performance of his
intelligence chiefs before Senate hearings, or the resignation of Joe Kent, a
long-time Trump supporter and decorated veteran, who urged the president to
"reverse course" on Iran.
Trump
exhibits what popular imagination attributes to Machiavelli - ruthlessness,
norm-breaking, a focus on winning at any cost. But Machiavelli actually counselled
disciplined pragmatism, not chaos. He warned rulers against acting impulsively,
being hated by the population, or using cruelty excessively. Trump's
unpredictability is not strategic brilliance; it is the thrashing of a man
without principles, whose only consistent commitment is to himself.
Part III: The Traumatized Partner –
Israel's Ghosts
To
understand Israel's current trajectory, one must grapple with the Holocaust.
Six million Jews systematically exterminated. Entire communities erased.
Families who lost every relative in a single generation. The trauma of such
annihilation does not fade; it shapes identity across decades.
Modern
Germany made extraordinary efforts at reconciliation – Willy Brandt kneeling at
the Warsaw Ghetto memorial in 1970 symbolized genuine remorse. Yet for many
Jews, Holocaust remembrance is not about holding grudges against modern
Germany. It is about heeding a warning: civilization can collapse into
persecution with terrifying speed. "Never Again" became not just a
slogan but a moral principle.
This
trauma directly shaped Israel's founding in 1948 and its security doctrine ever
since. Pre-emptive military action, when a threat emerges, became embedded in
national strategy. Menachem Begin explicitly invoked the Holocaust when
justifying the 1981 strike on Iraq's nuclear reactor. Today, Israel maintains
one of the world's most advanced militaries, constantly vigilant.
Yet
vigilance can become paranoia. The Jewish experience as a "middleman
minority" across centuries—forced into finance and trade when other
professions were closed, then resented for those very roles—created a
historical pattern of vulnerability. In medieval Europe, Jews were forbidden
from owning land, excluded from guilds, yet blamed when economic crises hit.
During the Black Death, they were falsely accused of poisoning wells and
massacred. The "deicide charge" fuelled religious antisemitism for
centuries, later transmuting into racial ideology under the Nazis.
This
history explains much, but it does not excuse everything. Israeli leaders have
faced genuine threats – existential challenges from neighbours who denied their
right to exist. Yet they have also made choices that perpetuated conflict
rather than resolving it.
Part IV: Two Paths Not Taken
Israeli
leaders differed significantly in their approaches to coexistence. David
Ben-Gurion focused on survival rather than expansion. Yitzhak Rabin signed the
Oslo Accords, working with Yasser Arafat to establish Palestinian
self-government – and was assassinated for it by an Israeli extremist in 1995.
Shimon Peres advocated regional cooperation. Ehud Barak attempted comprehensive
peace at Camp David in 2000; the talks failed, but they represented genuine
effort.
The
confrontational path was taken by others. Menachem Begin, despite making peace
with Egypt's Sadat, also invaded Lebanon in 1982. Ariel Sharon expanded
settlements aggressively. And then there is Benjamin Netanyahu.
Netanyahu,
like Trump, carries significant personal baggage – indictments for bribery,
fraud, and breach of trust that have shadowed his political career. He is
Israel's longest-serving prime minister, and his tenure has been marked by
systematic efforts to weaken judicial independence and by relentless focus on
Iran as existential threat. He opposed the 2015 nuclear deal vehemently and has
consistently undermined Palestinian statehood.
The
question must be asked: Is Netanyahu's approach – and by extension, Israel's
current trajectory – actually jeopardizing the country's long-term survival?
Military dominance and occupation policies generate inevitable resentment.
Unresolved conflict with Palestinians poisons relations across the Arab world.
Yet peace agreements with Egypt (1978) and Jordan (1994) demonstrate that
diplomacy can work. Even recent normalization with UAE and Bahrain under the
Abraham Accords suggests that geopolitical interests can override ideology –
though these deals bypass Palestinians rather than resolving the core issue.
In
the Western mind, the logic is clear: if Israel appears weak, it invites
attack; if it relies only on force, it deepens hostility. But perhaps an
Eastern perspective offers wisdom: a durable strategy requires both
strength and reconciliation. Strength deters enemies;
reconciliation transforms them into something else.
Part V: The Iran War – Quagmire Deepens
I
do not normally indulge conspiracy theories. But the Epstein factor in this war
deserves examination – not as proven fact, but as plausible explanation for
otherwise inexplicable behaviour. Jeffrey Epstein's web of powerful
connections, particularly to Trump, raises unsettling questions. Whether or not
Epstein was an Israeli intelligence operative running "honey traps,"
the appearance of such control further erodes faith in
American leadership. Many observers find in this shadowy influence a plausible
reason for Trump's seemingly unwavering support for Netanyahu's hawkish agenda.
Whatever
the cause, the result is clear: the US is now bogged down in a war that defies
easy resolution. Trump boasted it would end in one day. Now he says it will end
"when I feel it in my bones." The conflict drags on because Iran is
not Iraq, Afghanistan, or Venezuela.
Iran
is vast – nearly four times the size of Iraq – mountainous, and fiercely
nationalistic. Foreign attacks historically strengthen internal unity there.
Its military strategy relies on asymmetric warfare: missiles and drones,
decentralized command, regional proxies like Hezbollah and the Houthis. It can
absorb damage without collapsing. Meanwhile, the Strait of Hormuz – through which
20% of global oil passes – becomes a pressure point. Effectively, Iran is
blockading it.
The
US faces an impossible dilemma. Full invasion would mean massive casualties and
prolonged occupation, which the American public will not support. Limited
strikes cannot end the conflict decisively. So it pursues a middle path –
airstrikes – which tends to drag on indefinitely, bleeding resources and
resolve.
If
Iran can outlast the US politically, raise the cost of intervention, and deploy
its arsenal judiciously – much of it now enhanced by sophisticated Chinese
electronic warfare technology – it will survive. Both the US and Israel are
likely to emerge from this war wounded to the core. Europe and Japan will
suffer economic consequences. Only China and Russia stand to benefit.
Part VI: The Beneficiaries – A New Order
Takes Shape
Thomas
Friedman, for whom I have little regard, has been quoted approvingly by Chinese
commentators for saying Trump is "the American president China
deserved." The point is well taken: Trump's approach has undermined US
alliances, withdrawn from international agreements, and alienated traditional
partners – all of which makes China's global positioning easier.
Militarily,
China has already achieved parity with the US in many areas, particularly
missile technology and electronic warfare. To ensure a peaceful world, it must
maintain this pace, effectively rendering the US the runner-up. Recent reports
suggest China has cracked EUV lithography technology – a critical breakthrough
in semiconductor manufacturing achieved despite Western blockade. Its lunar
program progresses steadily toward manned landings. In space, as in so many
domains, China is demonstrating that it can not only match but surpass American
achievements.
Diplomatically,
China's stance on Ukraine, its stances on tariff wars, its measured response to
the Iran crisis – all contrast favourably with American bellicosity. The world
increasingly sees that China does not seek to export its political system; it
recognizes that its model is uniquely suited to its own civilization. This
restraint builds trust.
Russia,
meanwhile, benefits from higher oil prices and European dependence on its
energy. Ukraine will likely have to surrender eventually, and Europe will
eventually eat humble pie and return to Russian gas. The continent has lost its
bearings, its anchoring purpose fading. EU and NATO resemble headless chickens,
led by figures of diminishing stature.
Part
VII: The Shape of Things to Come
What
emerges from this chaos will not be a new American Century, nor necessarily a
Chinese one. A multipolar world is taking shape – messy, contested, but
potentially more balanced than what came before.
The
United States will likely become more like Europe: no longer globally
threatening, still relevant in scientific research and higher education, but
diminished in hard power. Europe itself may become a haven for tourism and
culture, its geopolitical ambitions scaled back.
Middle
powers – Canada, Australia, India, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Brazil, Japan,
Indonesia – will gain autonomy. They will no longer need to look to Washington
for nods or frowns. India's Narendra Modi, however, must recognize that hugging
everyone simultaneously becomes untenable eventually. Stances must clarify as
the new order solidifies.
The
Global South will continue to count on China for prosperity, infrastructure,
and development financing. Institutional bodies like the UN and WTO, with China
and the Global South's support, may finally return to their intended roles.
Accelerating
factors could hasten this transition: Taiwan's return to China's fold, a major
world economic crisis, or further American overreach. But the trend is already
clear.
Conclusion: From Quagmire to Opportunity
The
Iran war is not an end but a painful beginning. Trump and Netanyahu, in their
moral bankruptcy and strategic blindness, have stumbled into a quagmire that
exposes the limits of American and Israeli power. Yet in that exposure lies
possibility.
For
decades, the US-led order presented itself as inevitable – the "end of
history" beyond which no alternative could exist. That illusion has now
shattered. A new world order is emerging, not through some grand design but
through the accumulation of American missteps and Chinese patience. It will be
multipolar, contested, and unpredictable. Whether it becomes benign – focused on
cooperation, development, and peace – depends on the wisdom of leaders in
Beijing, New Delhi, Brussels, and a chastened Washington.
The
quagmire in Iran may yet prove, for the rest of the world, a heaven-sent
opportunity to build something better. Goodness, as I believe, does tend to
prevail—but only when given the chance.
End
Postscript: I coined the title to mean it negatively on Trump and Netanyahu, but the choice of the term “Heaven-sent” might irk many friends and readers. Be that as it may, do hear me out, but feel free to disagree!