The US is restoring its unipolar hegemony over the hemisphere, beginning with its “quarter-sphere”, because there are no checks or balances.
Andrew Korybko
Secretary of War Pete Hegseth spoke in early March about “Greater North America”,
which includes “every sovereign nation and territory north of the
Equator, from Greenland to Ecuador and from Alaska to Guyana.” He added
that “It is our immediate security perimeter in this great neighborhood
that we all live in. Each one of these countries border either the North
Atlantic or the North Pacific.” This concept is actually quite
sensible, but it’s also understandable why it elicits fear from some
within this space too.
The Russian School of Multipolarism
teaches that Great and Regional Powers, especially civilization-states
(those that left lasting socio-political legacies on others over the
centuries), play the main role in the global systemic transition. They
also have spheres of influence, which sometimes overlap with their
civilizational footprint, where they’re most sensitive to security
threats. Russia’s is the former Soviet space (“Near Abroad”), India’s is
all of South Asia, and the US’ is “Greater North America”, et al.
This
is natural, but it’s also natural that some within these spheres are
fearful of these leading countries playing a greater role in their
regions, which can be attributed to historical reasons as well as
contemporary political ones that are also sometimes exploited by
demagogues and third parties. Returning to the earlier examples, the
Balts hate Russia, Pakistan feels the same about India (and Bangladesh
is following in its footsteps), and ditto how many Mexicans and Latinos feel about the US.
Russia
can’t directly resolve Baltic-emanating threats due to those countries’
membership in NATO and India can’t fully resolve Pakistani-emanating
ones due to its nuclear status, but the US can resolve what its
leadership perceives or even just simply claims to be “quarter-sphere”
threats to its security. It’s unimportant whether one agrees or
disagrees with the US’ assessments since the point is that none of
“Greater North America’s” countries have nukes or mutual defense pacts
with nuclear-armed countries.
This vulnerability, which
won’t realistically be rectified, emboldens Trump 2.0 to unilaterally
reshape “Greater North America’s” geopolitics in its favor as proven by
its bold capture of Maduro and de facto (but not strictly enforced) blockade of Cuba for “regime tweaking” purposes. It might soon more fully resubordinate Mexico
too, though it remains unclear exactly which means could be employed to
this end. The point is that the only restraints upon the US’ behavior
are those that it imposes upon itself.
The
demonstration effect of capturing Maduro and de facto blockading Cuba
might therefore lead to more bandwagoning instead of balancing against
the US and risking Trump 2.0’s wrath. In that scenario, the influence of
non-hemispheric countries like China and Russia will be reduced to a
bare minimum, while closer coordination
on tackling the threats posed by illegal immigration and cartels is
likely. The end result would be strengthening “Fortress America” as the
US’ near-exclusive sphere of influence.
Circling back to
the introduction, this is quite sensible from its perspective regardless
of one’s opinion about it, and it’s understandable why this elicits
fear from some in this space too. The US is restoring its unipolar
hegemony over the hemisphere, beginning with its “quarter-sphere”,
because there are no checks or balances. Russia, India, and similar
powers struggle to do the same within their own spheres of influence in
no small part because the US weaponizes their adversaries for
containment purposes.