Doubts about the reliability of the United States as a security provider are also encouraging U.S. allies in Europe and Asia to strengthen their own defenses. NATO countries have pledged to raise their overall defense spending to five percent of GDP by 2035, and Japan’s defense spending has reached its target of two percent of GDP this year. There is high and growing public support in some allied countries, such as South Korea, for developing their own nuclear weapons.
Yet building credible conventional and nuclear deterrents will take time. During this transition, these allies will continue to depend on U.S. support and cooperation because neither Tokyo nor Seoul trusts China or Russia to protect their security.
The goal shouldn’t be a “multipolar” world, the goal should be international democracy and the rule of law. Yes, laws require enforcement and that means some kind of state, with a monopoly on the legal use of violence, must exist. These ding dongs want the US to continue to fill that role. But there are a couple problems with how the US has played the role of global rule enforcer: one, the US is unelected and unaccountable. For a state to govern legitimately, it must have the consent of the governed. Outside of NATO, and perhaps a few other countries, no consent was given, or for that matter even sought. Two, The US seeks to protect its own interests, and that of our allies, not to enforce laws for all countries equally and objectively. Does that sound like the rule of law or a corrupt cop?