跳至主要内容

The final battle to defend imperial hegemony has already begun.


Let’s get straight to the point: The last-ditch effort to preserve American hegemony is underway. To understand why, let’s examine a series of seemingly unrelated events.

First, on May 6th, in a surprising turn of events, both the Omanis and then Trump announced that the United States and the Houthi rebels from Yemen—two of the world’s major military powers—had reached a ceasefire agreement. The deal was simple: If the Houthis stopped attacking American ships passing through the Red Sea and the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait, the U.S. would cease its airstrikes on Yemen. Consequently, B-2 bombers and other military assets that had been deployed to Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean were flown back to the United States. This move was not only kept secret from the Israelis beforehand but also ignored the ongoing missile and drone attacks by the Houthis on Israel. As everyone knows, Israel is often referred to as America’s closest ally in the region. At that time, Israel was completely unaware and was still actively bombing the Houthis. When Trump decided to pull back, the Israelis were left fuming, feeling abandoned by their so-called “protector.”
The second event that left the Israelis seething was the sudden news that Trump was about to formally recognize Palestine as a state. The reports claimed that Trump would only recognize a Palestinian government that excluded Hamas. This sudden shift in stance was bewildering to the Israelis. Just three months earlier, in February, Trump had been furious over UNESCO’s recognition of Palestine as a full member state. Now, the U.S. was on the verge of recognizing Palestine itself. The Israelis were so outraged that they vowed to take “unilateral action” if the U.S. went ahead with its plans. They declared that if America wouldn’t stand with them, Israel would act alone.
The third incident that irked the Israelis occurred on May 11th when Hamas announced the release of Eitan Alexander, an Israeli soldier who also holds American citizenship.

The Americans immediately trumpeted this as a victory, claiming that the last American hostage held by Hamas had been freed. The Israelis, however, were unhappy because they were completely left out of the negotiations. The deal was struck between the U.S., Qatar, Egypt, and Hamas, and Israel was merely informed afterward. One can only imagine the frustration the Israelis felt upon hearing the news.
But that wasn’t all. From May 13th to 16th, Trump embarked on a visit to three Arab countries: Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. What was truly bizarre was that he skipped Israel entirely. Given that Israel is often seen as America’s closest ally in the region, it seemed odd that Trump wouldn’t even make a courtesy visit. Even his defense secretary, who had initially planned to go, was told not to. This was Trump’s first overseas trip since taking office, and such a visit usually holds great significance. Traditionally, American presidents often choose the United Kingdom for their first foreign visit to highlight the “special relationship” between the two countries. Instead, Trump chose Saudi Arabia, and the visit was filled with grand gestures and promises. He declared his intention to “end the conflict in Gaza as soon as possible,” which immediately drew a strong reaction from Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, who vowed to intensify Israel’s military operations in Gaza.
Trump’s visit was marked by a flurry of deals and promises. The U.S. and Saudi Arabia signed what was described as the “largest arms deal in history,” worth a staggering $142 billion. There were also whispers that the U.S. might sell F-35 stealth fighters to Saudi Arabia, a move that would have been unthinkable just a few years ago. Historically, the U.S. had always ensured that any weapons sold to Arab countries were at least one generation behind those provided to Israel. Other deals included investments in technology and infrastructure, with companies like Google and Oracle promising billions in investments in the region.

The Saudis, in turn, rolled out the red carpet—literally and figuratively—for Trump. Their F-15 fighter jets escorted his plane, the crown prince broke protocol to greet him personally, and the royal guard provided a ceremonial escort. Trump, in return, praised the crown prince as a “young tough guy” and assured the Saudis that he would not interfere in their internal affairs or “tell them how to live.”
All of this raises a question: Why is Trump acting so differently? Why is he openly defying Israel and kowtowing to the Saudis and other Gulf states? Why is he breaking so many long-standing red lines, such as potentially selling F-35s to Saudi Arabia?

The answer lies in a broader geopolitical strategy. Historically, the region stretching from India to the Middle East has always been a pivotal area for global powers.

First, it is rich in resources. The Middle East is known for its vast oil and natural gas reserves. Further south, towards Africa, there are numerous other valuable mineral resources like gold, copper, iron, and nickel. Controlling these resources is akin to controlling the world’s industrial lifeline. For example, China’s steel production in 2020 exceeded 1 billion tons, more than the combined output of all other countries. Yet, despite this massive production, the profits were meager because the control of mineral resources lies elsewhere.
Second, the region is a crucial transportation hub. Any trade route from East Asia to Europe that avoids the harsh Siberian terrain must pass through this area. The same applies to routes from Asia to Africa.

By sea, the Red Sea, Suez Canal, Strait of Gibraltar, and Turkish Straits all pass through this region. Controlling these chokepoints allows for the collection of tolls and fees, making it a highly lucrative position.
This strategy is not new. The British Empire used a similar approach. With just a few thousand civil servants and a small military presence, they controlled India and reaped enormous profits. This allowed them to fund further colonial expansions. Without India, the British Empire would never have achieved its global dominance.

The Americans have long recognized the strategic importance of this region. This is why the U.S. has been pushing the “Indo-Pacific Strategy” in recent years. The goal is to draw India closer to the U.S. so that it can serve as a counterbalance in the region. However, recent events have disrupted this plan. On May 7th, during a dogfight, India was soundly defeated by Pakistan.

Despite India’s claims of victory, it has lost its ability to pose a significant threat in the region. This has effectively undermined the U.S.’s Indo-Pacific Strategy.
In response, the U.S. has had to pivot. Trump’s recent actions—distancing from Israel and courting the Gulf states—are part of a desperate attempt to shore up American influence in the region. However, everyone involved knows that Israel remains America’s most important ally. The promises Trump is making, especially the critical ones, may never come to fruition.
In essence, despite the fanfare and public displays, the reality is more complex. It’s a game of pretense: everyone knows what’s really going on, but no one wants to be the first to expose the truth. So, they continue to play along. But one thing is clear: the final battle to preserve American hegemony has begun. The wheels of great change are turning faster than we might have imagined.

评论

此博客中的热门博文

Why China's Seizure of Three Tunnel Boring Machines Has India’s Bullet Train Project Stuck in Neutral

June 24, IndiaNet – India’s first high-speed rail line, the Mumbai-Ahmedabad bullet train, has hit yet another roadblock. Three massive tunnel-boring machines (TBMs), ordered from Germany’s Herrenknecht AG but manufactured in Guangzhou, China, have been stuck in Chinese customs for eight months. The delay has frozen progress on a critical 12-kilometer undersea tunnel, marking the project’s ninth major setback. The Stuck Machines The TBMs were supposed to arrive in India by October 2024. Instead, they sit in a bonded warehouse in Guangzhou, with no clear timeline for release. India’s National High-Speed Rail Corporation (NHSRC) blames Beijing for “deliberate obstruction,” while Chinese authorities remain silent. The Mumbai-Ahmedabad corridor—India’s first bullet train, modeled on Japan’s Shinkansen—was supposed to slash travel time between the two cities from 7 hours to 2. Funded largely by a ¥1.25 trillion ($15 billion) Japanese loan at 0.1% interest over 50 years , the project was sl...

Open-Source Intelligence Analysis of the 2025 India-Pakistan Military Standoff

  In the recent India-Pakistan standoff, open-source intelligence (OSINT) channels have played an extremely important role in information dissemination and intelligence analysis. Various open-source platforms, including social media, commercial satellite imagery, vessel and aviation tracking data, news reports, and military forums, have collectively formed a "second front" for battlefield situational awareness, helping all parties to promptly understand and verify the dynamics of the conflict. However, the reliability of different OSINT channels varies, and it is necessary to cross-reference them to obtain the most accurate intelligence possible. Below is an analysis of the main channels: Social Media (Twitter/X, Facebook, etc.) Social media platforms are among the fastest sources for disseminating information about the conflict. A large number of first-hand witnesses, journalists, and even soldiers post photos, videos, and written reports through social media. For example, r...

A Historic Moment: The US-China Geneva Joint Statement

  Today, many friends have left messages in the backend, asking me to discuss the US-China Geneva Joint Statement and what it means. Let’s get straight to the conclusion: with the announcement of this statement, today has become a historic moment. But why do I say that? Let’s first look at the main content of the statement. The US has committed to canceling the 91% tariffs that were imposed on April 8th and 9th. The 34% and 24% tariffs imposed on April 2nd will be suspended for 90 days, with only 10% retained. We are doing the same: canceling the 91% retaliatory tariffs, suspending the 34% and 24% tariffs imposed on April 2nd for 90 days, and retaining 10%. In simple terms, both sides are returning to the status quo before Trump announced the “reciprocal tariffs” on April 2nd, and then each adding an additional 10%. How should we view this outcome? Let’s first look at what Bercow said before heading to Geneva. He stated that he didn’t expect to reach any agreement with the Chinese ...