Thread by @RoryStewartUK

For almost 80 years the concept of a stable predictable US global order led US allies to integrate the most fundamental aspects of their security, and finances into a US-dominated system. They felt this was relatively risk free. Until now. 🧵

https://twitter.com/restispolitics/status/1885357376082981130

The US had been able to borrow cheap money for years, and establish itself as the world’s reserve currency in part because it was seen as a predictable player, surrounded by allies and good for its debts.

US loans, grants, security guarantees, bases, and defence sales wove a network of allies across the world to create a global order and set of rules which have enshrined the US’ position as the world’s richest nation and indispensable power.

This interdependence created opportunities for its allies - and also extreme vulnerabilities. But the US was cautious in how it used the allies which it had made dep dependent on it. Its demand were usually limited, and couched in the language of the “rules-based order”

Jordan for example hosted US bases, had a vital significance for Israel and was central to Middle East stability. The US did not commit 10 BN to the Jordanian budget over 6 years out of pure altruism. Nor did Jordan sign that contract as part of a protection racket,

Had the US provided security and then threatened to withdraw it on whim; sold weapons and then threatened to disable them; signed contracts to provide budget support and then broken those contracts; signed trade agreements and flouted them they would have had serfs but no allies.

If US Presidents had made arbitrary proclamations, ignored all treaty obligations and contracts but also their own congress and legal system, they would have had no soft power. No ability to assert global norms or form global coalitions. They would have struggled to finance debt

Trump is using the links and interdependencies created by 80 years of US alliance and global leadership as a protection racket. Each weakness of his allies is there not to be overcome but exploited. Everyone who relies on the US is treated as a sucker.

He appears to believe that he pulled of the best of a lifetime. That he can squander 80 years of US investment in soft power overnight. And make others pay. His is the approach of the monopolist, the price gouger and the gangster.

Which country will want to do business with the US on the same terms in the future? Who will join its coalitions, back its ideals or defend its rules?