Power play or final push? Analysts say US strategy is backfiring worldwide

By Akhtar Pathan

KARACHI, Pakistan (MNTV) — As the global balance of power shifts toward Asia and the Global South, the United States is doubling down on old doctrines and hard power in its own hemisphere. Analysts warn that these moves, rather than restoring U.S. dominance, may deepen mistrust, weaken international norms, and speed the rise of new power centers.

Washington’s actions in Western Hemisphere ­— abduction of Venezuelan president, claims on Greenland, Canada etc. —, justified under what critics derisively call the “Donroe Doctrine” — a play on Monroe Doctrine — are unlikely to produce the results President Donald Trump seeks, analysts say.

Instead, they warn, the effort to reverse history may accelerate the very decline the U.S. hopes to prevent.

The moves are being interpreted by many analysts not as a show of strength, but as a sign of weakness, a last-ditch effort by a declining superpower to preserve what remains of its global dominance.

The Monroe Doctrine, proclaimed in 1823, warned European powers against intervening in the Western Hemisphere and positioned the United States as a self-appointed guardian of the Americas, a stance later used to justify U.S. dominance in the region. Critics say the so-called “Donroe Doctrine” — shorthand for President Donald Trump’s approach — abandons even that pretense, replacing deterrence with overt coercion, regime-change threats and unilateral force. Where Monroe sought to block foreign empires, the Donroe Doctrine is seen as asserting U.S. supremacy itself, signaling a willingness to discard diplomacy and international norms to impose power closer to home.

A challenge to the global order

Former ambassador Sanaullah, who has more than three decades of diplomatic experience, says the doctrine poses a direct challenge to the post-World War II international order, even if its full implementation lies beyond Trump’s capacity.

“The American administration cannot follow through on the bluster and bluff without seriously jeopardizing U.S. global interests,” he said. “The unilateral interventions have damaged the basic structure of global order, reinforcing the idea that might still reigns.”

While China, Russia, North Korea and several Latin American countries have condemned the U.S. actions — particularly those that could set precedents for regime change — Sanaullah says the reaction does not amount to a credible rebuff. He adds that debates at the United Nations have little practical consequence, especially after Washington’s withdrawal from dozens of international agencies.

“The global order was already fragile,” he said. “The U.S. retreat from multilateralism has weakened it further, at a time when multipolarity is emerging at least at the regional level.”

This trend, he argues, has exposed the vulnerability of collective security arrangements and reflects a reversion to a colonial mindset. The muted response from developed nations, he adds, is particularly troubling.

Trump’s legacy and impulse politics

Sanaullah says Trump appears determined to script his legacy as one of the most powerful U.S. presidents in history, guided by “America First” and “Make America Great Again” slogans and reinforced by military operations in the Gulf and beyond.

Many analysts once believed the U.S. establishment would restrain such impulses, forcing the president to abandon risky ventures. That expectation has not materialized, Sanaullah says, and is unlikely to as long as Trump remains in office.

“He trusts his own instincts rather than collective wisdom and institutional analysis,” he said. “Trump may gain personally — he will boast and exaggerate his achievements — but the American state will lose in the long run.”

‘The last flicker of a candle’

Muhammad Osama Shafiq, associate professor at the University of Karachi’s Department of Mass Communication, agrees that renewed American assertiveness reflects decline rather than revival.

“It is absolutely clear that America is a declining power,” he said. “This is an attempt to salvage influence in the Atlantic and secure the southern hemisphere because it can no longer afford to hold vast overseas interests or wage prolonged wars.”

Shafiq likens recent U.S. actions to “the last sputter of a candle flame, flickering before being snuffed out.” He says Washington understands it no longer enjoys the same global stature and is resorting to limited, symbolic operations to remind the world of its might.

The U.S., he argues, has narrowed its focus to the Atlantic and the Americas, explaining both its posture toward Venezuela and assertions regarding Greenland. “It does not plan to go beyond the Atlantic,” he said.

According to Shafiq, America’s restraint toward Iran is also evidence of decline. “It does not want to engage militarily elsewhere,” he said. “It will rely on threats, warnings, or at most surgical strikes — not boots on the ground.”

If confrontation becomes unavoidable, he added, Washington would likely rely on Israel to contain Iran rather than intervene directly.

Chaos as political currency

Shafiq also draws parallels between Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, arguing that both leaders benefit politically from prolonged instability.

Netanyahu, facing corruption charges and war-related accusations, has little incentive to pursue peace, Shafiq said, as regional chaos diverts global attention from Gaza. He notes that when a recent peace deal involving the U.S., Hamas and Israel was presented in the Knesset weeks later, neither Netanyahu nor treasury officials were present, and it passed with opposition support.

“Chaos suits Trump,” Shafiq said. “He uses it to project power. Netanyahu does the same to prolong his rule.”

Technology shifts and Chinese ascendancy

Shafiq says a critical but underreported factor in U.S. decision-making is technological competition with China. The brief India-Pakistan conflict earlier this year, he said, showcased the effectiveness of Chinese military technology. More recently, Iran’s ability to jam Starlink satellite internet — reportedly using Chinese systems — has deepened U.S. concerns.

“It has demonstrated that China has not only matched but surpassed the U.S. in certain military and communication technologies,” he said. “Fear of Chinese electronic, cyber and military capabilities is a major reason Washington avoided attacking Iran.”

Another factor, he added, is the certainty that any war with Iran would directly impact Israel, exposing it to missile retaliation.

In this context, Shafiq argues, both the U.S. and Israel are now perceived as declining powers, increasingly reliant on disruptive tactics to maintain relevance.

A precedent with global consequences

Faisal Javaid, head of the International Relations Department at Federal Urdu University in Islamabad, says U.S. actions in Venezuela have established a dangerous new precedent.

“Russia’s actions in Crimea or Ukraine were justified — at least in Moscow’s view — by historical and political contexts,” he said. “But what America has done in Venezuela signals that a powerful country can kidnap a sitting head of state to enforce regime change.”

While Javaid doubts China or Russia would replicate such behavior, he warns that the option has now entered the realm of possibility in a multipolar world.

“What was once unthinkable has become conceivable,” he said.

Shifting alliances and new power centers

Analysts say the fallout is already visible in the Middle East. Since the first Gulf War, much of the region relied on U.S. security guarantees. But after years of conflict — and particularly since Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack and the war in Gaza — regional states are reassessing that dependence.

Arab and Sunni countries, analysts say, increasingly recognize that reliance on U.S. technology limits their strategic autonomy. With the exception of the United Arab Emirates, many are turning toward Chinese systems, often through Pakistan. Even Qatar, despite hosting U.S. military bases, is reportedly shifting in that direction.

“A full transition will take time,” Shafiq said. “But the realization is deepening. If a major war erupts, the shift could accelerate dramatically.”

Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Iran, he added, appear to be coordinating this strategic reorientation — a move that could reshape regional power balances in the coming years.

‘Might is right’

Ultimately, analysts argue, U.S. actions have undermined the very principles Washington once championed: international law, democracy and human rights.

“The message to the world is stark,” Javaid said. “There is no ethics, no law — only power.”

That perception, he added, will hasten the rise of new power centers as middle and smaller states seek alternative security guarantors to avoid meeting a similar fate.

Far from restoring American dominance, analysts say, Washington’s latest moves may mark another step in its gradual retreat from the center of the global stage.