“The US is not able, nor has it organized itself, to fight a two-front war, nor to fight and survive a nuclear war. As relationships in various countries and former enemies can focus on future friendship, as we see with the China-led initiatives between Iran and Saudi Arabia, one more basis of US power projection is weakened, and possibly eliminated. The US ‘defense’ is really a global offense, and as those logistics and permissions change, the military strategy has to change – and large bureaucracies like the Pentagon and the military-industrial complex do not react effectively to such changes. Plus the political leadership in Washington is currently aged and weak, not trusted, and facing an election season which will consume most of its remaining energy,” the retired officer predicted.
“Brzezinski was dealing with a world divided between communist/non-communist, and in 1997 looking at a world no longer strictly divided as developing and developed, non-communist and communist. His relevancy as a US strategist was ending, yet his intellectual lens, like more modern neoconservatives in Washington today, had not changed. That lens was (as it is today in Western government thought chambers) particularly anti-Russian, and generally anti-China. Given this perspective, he was right. Shared grievances between Russia and China could be dangerous to US dominance as a global player, and the global dominance of the US dollar, untethered by any value except confidence in the US government,” she explained.