Analysis: The world Washington built is fraying. What comes next? – WTOP News

The United States is confronting a global security environment that increasingly resembles the outcome its Cold War adversaries once hoped to produce: a divided West, weakened alliances, economic exhaustion, multiple simultaneous wars and declining confidence in American leadership.

That does not mean today’s crises were orchestrated according to some surviving Soviet master plan. The Soviet Union is gone, and the threats facing Washington now come from several different states with different interests. But the strategic effect is strikingly familiar.

Early NATO assessments of Soviet intentions warned that Moscow sought to weaken the democratic powers, deny the West a secure European base and ultimately exhaust North America economically. Now, NATO says Russia is again trying to reconfigure the Euro-Atlantic security order through military force, sabotage, cyberattacks, coercion and disinformation.

The difference is that much of the pressure now confronting the West is occurring simultaneously — and some of the damage to alliance cohesion is self-inflicted.

The United States is fighting a prolonged war against Iran while Russia’s war against Ukraine grinds into its fifth year. North Korea is expanding its nuclear arsenal and military relationship with Moscow. China is increasing pressure on Taiwan and testing American alliances across Asia.

Energy prices are rising sharply because of the Iran war, damage to Gulf refining capacity and Ukrainian attacks on Russian energy infrastructure. Reuters estimates more than 20% of Middle Eastern refining capacity is currently offline, while European diesel prices have risen more than 70% and U.S. gasoline prices roughly 60% since February.

At the same time, Washington’s relationships with some of its closest partners have become increasingly transactional and unpredictable.

President Donald Trump has threatened Greenland, publicly attacked NATO members that resisted supporting the Iran war, ordered U.S. troop reductions in Europe and recently ordered military exercises with South Korea reduced while criticizing Seoul for refusing to support U.S. operations against Iran. NATO spent much of its July summit trying to reassure itself that the transatlantic alliance remained intact.

A Pew Research Center survey across 36 countries found only 37% hold a favorable view of the United States, while 57% view it unfavorably. Just 35% believe the U.S. contributes to global peace and stability. Confidence in Trump’s handling of world affairs stands at a median of 23%. In Germany, the share saying Washington takes other countries’ interests into account has collapsed from 60% in 2023 to 23% today.

That matters strategically because alliances are not sentimental arrangements.

They are force multipliers.

The United States spent generations building a global system that allows it to operate from bases in Europe and Asia, share intelligence with highly capable partners, impose coordinated sanctions, protect shipping lanes and confront adversaries without carrying every burden alone.

Weakening trust in those relationships does not make America more independent. It can make America more isolated.

And that is where the historical parallel becomes uncomfortable.

For decades, Moscow sought to widen disagreements between the United States and Europe, weaken NATO cohesion and persuade Western publics that American leadership created instability rather than security.

Today’s Russian government continues using disinformation, sabotage and political interference to exploit the same fault lines. NATO explicitly describes Russia’s hybrid strategy as an attempt to undermine allied societies and the rules-based international order.

But Washington cannot blame Moscow for every crack in the alliance.

Some now come directly from differences between the United States and its partners over tariffs, Iran, Ukraine, Greenland, military deployments and the basic meaning of alliance consultation.

The answer is not a return to an earlier era in which Washington paid every bill and allies avoided difficult defense decisions.

Europe does need greater military capacity. South Korea and Japan need to assume more responsibility for regional deterrence. NATO members need deeper ammunition stocks, stronger air defenses and larger defense industries.

That shift is already underway. Norway is expanding its Arctic forces and spending more than 3% of its GDP on defense. European NATO members are sharply increasing military budgets and preparing for a future in which American forces may be less available.

But burden-sharing and estrangement are not the same thing.

A stronger alliance is one in which allies contribute more because they trust one another — not because they fear abandonment.

The path forward therefore requires several changes.

First, Washington needs to define its priorities. The United States cannot indefinitely fight a major Middle Eastern war, support Ukraine, deter China, reinforce South Korea and sustain global naval commitments without making difficult choices about forces, weapons production and objectives.

Second, America needs political end states for its wars. Military pressure without a realistic diplomatic destination risks converting temporary conflicts into permanent drains on American power.

Third, Washington has to stop treating allies as disposable instruments. Disagreements are unavoidable. Public threats and humiliation are choices.

Fourth, Europe and Asian allies must accelerate their own defense buildup so American leadership becomes less synonymous with American dependency.

And finally, the West needs to defend something larger than military territory.

It needs to defend the credibility of the idea that democracies working together are more secure and prosperous than countries operating alone.

That may be the most important contest underway.

The Soviet Union spent decades trying to persuade the world that Western unity was artificial, American leadership was exploitative and democratic alliances would eventually collapse under their own contradictions.

It never succeeded.

The danger now is not that Moscow finally found a brilliant strategy. It’s that the West appears to be doing much of that work itself.

Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

© 2026 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.