The End of Pax Americana: How Syrian Withdrawal Signals Global Order Collapse

America's chaotic withdrawal from Syria represents the first major watershed in post-Cold War order breakdown, as regional powers like Turkey fill the vacuum while traditional allies scramble to align with Russia and other rising powers in an increasingly multipolar world.

Key Takeaways

• The US finds itself strategically aligned with Assad against Turkey after eight years of trying to overthrow the Syrian government, representing a complete foreign policy reversal.
• Turkey's invasion of Syria demonstrates how regional powers now feel empowered to use military force as American security guarantees erode across traditional alliance structures.
• European security depends entirely on American guarantees, creating vulnerabilities as countries like Greece may need to align with Russia to counter Turkish aggression in the Aegean.
• The $5 trillion spent on Middle East wars since 2001 was borrowed money that future generations must repay, enabling foreign policy adventures without immediate public accountability.
• Corruption pervades American foreign policy through pay-to-play special interest groups, exemplified by figures like Bolton gaining influence through billionaire donors rather than strategic merit.
• Putin emerges as the region's premier statesman and mediator, welcomed by former American allies who now distrust Washington's reliability and seek Russian protection.
• America's democracy promotion strategy proved fundamentally flawed, as Middle Eastern societies lacked the constitutional foundations necessary for stable democratic transitions.
• The world is transitioning to 19th-century realpolitik with multiple competing powers rather than the bipolar Cold War structure or unipolar American dominance.

Timeline Overview

• 00:00–15:23 — Syrian Reversal and Strategic Alignment: Joshua Landis explains how America now finds itself aligned with Assad against Turkey, reversing eight years of regime change policy as Kurdish allies abandon US for Damascus protection
• 15:23–28:47 — Reputational Damage and ISIS Implications: Discussion of how chaotic withdrawal damaged American credibility while potentially reviving ISIS, with analysis of Landis's prescient 2012 warnings about leaving Syrians "in the lurch"
• 28:47–42:15 — Corruption in Foreign Policy: Examination of how special interests drive policy decisions, from Trump's Turkish business connections to Bolton's appointment through Adelson's influence, creating transactional rather than strategic foreign policy
• 42:15–55:39 — Turkish Expansionism and Regional Power Shifts: Analysis of Erdoğan's neo-Ottoman ambitions, Turkey's growing military assertiveness, and how regional powers exploit American withdrawal to pursue territorial expansion
• 55:39–68:52 — European Vulnerabilities and Alliance Realignment: Discussion of how European security depends on American guarantees, creating risks as countries like Greece may align with Russia to counter Turkish threats
• 68:52–82:17 — The End of Rules-Based Order: Exploration of transition from American hegemony to multipolar competition, comparing current dynamics to 19th-century realpolitik with multiple powers vying for influence
• 82:17–95:43 — Strategic Interests and Future Scenarios: Analysis of America's core Middle East interests (Israel, Persian Gulf oil), discussing best and worst-case scenarios for managed versus chaotic retreat from global commitments

America's Syrian About-Face: From Assad Must Go to Strategic Alignment

• The United States now finds itself strategically aligned with Bashar al-Assad against Turkish invasion, representing a complete reversal of eight years of regime change policy that began with Obama's declaration that "Assad must go."
• American forces fighting alongside Kurdish allies who have realigned with Damascus and Russian protection demonstrates how chaotic withdrawal creates strange bedfellows and strategic contradictions.
• The Kurdish abandonment of American partnership in favor of Assad protection occurred within days, revealing how quickly regional actors can pivot when superpower commitments prove unreliable.
• Turkish forces allied with Free Syrian Army rebels that America previously funded to overthrow Assad now fight against American-Kurdish positions, illustrating the complete inversion of previous alliance structures.
• Russian troops received controlled handovers of strategic positions like Manbij directly from American forces, symbolizing the transfer of regional influence from Washington to Moscow without resistance.
• The Syrian conflict's resolution effectively returns the country to its pre-2011 status with Assad controlling territory, Russian influence dominant, and American objectives completely abandoned after massive expenditure of resources.

Landis emphasizes the strategic absurdity: "We are putting sanctions on Turkey and we're telling Turkey to stop this incursion into Syria which is allowing Syrian troops to rush into places like Manbij—we just handed Manbij over to the Russian troops."

The $5 Trillion Foreign Policy Adventure on Borrowed Time

• America has spent over $5 trillion on Middle East wars since 2001, all borrowed money that future generations must repay, enabling foreign policy adventures without immediate public accountability or democratic oversight.
• The absence of direct financial consequences allows the foreign policy establishment to pursue expensive military interventions without considering opportunity costs or domestic priorities like education and infrastructure.
• Foreign policy corruption operates through special interest groups that "buy chunks of foreign policy," as exemplified by figures like John Bolton gaining influence through billionaire donors rather than strategic merit.
• Bolton's appointment as National Security Advisor occurred not through foreign policy expertise but through Sheldon Adelson's $100+ million Republican Party donations, creating transactional rather than strategic decision-making processes.
• Trump's business interests in Turkey (two towers in Istanbul) and Saudi Arabia (apartment sales to wealthy Saudis) demonstrate how personal financial relationships blur the lines between private gain and national interest.
• The pay-to-play system extends across the political spectrum, from Clinton Foundation activities to Hunter Biden's overseas positions, creating systematic corruption that undermines public trust in institutions.

The systemic nature becomes clear in Landis's assessment: "America has this incredible credit rating and it's borrowed over $20 trillion which our children are gonna have to repay, so we're getting to do these fantastic experiments on the cheap, at least it's on the cheap today."

Turkey's Neo-Ottoman Revival and Regional Power Projection

• Turkey under Erdoğan pursues expansionist policies that frame current territorial ambitions as recovering lands "stolen" after World War I, invoking Ottoman heritage to justify military aggression beyond national borders.
• The Turkish invasion of Syria represents more than counterterrorism against Kurdish forces—it signals broader ambitions to permanently alter regional borders while global powers are distracted or withdrawing.
• Erdoğan's plan to relocate two million Syrian refugees into conquered Kurdish territory would fundamentally alter the demographic composition of northern Syria, creating facts on the ground for permanent territorial control.
• Turkish military capabilities enable regional power projection that was previously constrained by American security guarantees, but American withdrawal removes those constraints and emboldens territorial expansion.
• The expansion extends beyond Syria into the Eastern Mediterranean, where Turkey challenges Greek territorial waters around Cyprus and Aegean islands, exploiting energy discoveries to assert maritime claims.
• Erdoğan's domestic political incentives align with expansionist policies, as Islamic and nationalist waves within Turkey provide popular support for military adventures that project strength and historical destiny.

Landis captures the historical parallel: "He talks about it as a time of the brave and the courageous—history is in flux and one has to stand astride this current, and one senses this sort of manifest destiny going back to the Ottoman Empire."

European Security Vulnerabilities in the Post-American Order

• European security architecture depends entirely on American military guarantees through NATO, creating fundamental vulnerabilities as American withdrawal reduces credible deterrence against regional powers like Turkey.
• Greece faces potential Turkish aggression in the Aegean Sea over territorial waters and energy rights, but lacks independent military capabilities to deter Turkish expansion without American backing.
• The prospect of Greek alignment with Russia becomes realistic as traditional American security guarantees erode, with Orthodox religious ties and historical Communist Party presence providing natural connection points.
• Cyprus already serves as a money laundering center for Russian capital, while Greece explores energy partnerships with both Israel and Russia as hedging strategies against Turkish pressure.
• European integration assumed permanent American security provision, but rising regional powers like Turkey exploit American absence to pursue territorial claims that the EU cannot independently resist.
• The shift toward Russian alignment mirrors broader Middle Eastern trends where traditional American allies seek Moscow's protection and mediation as Washington's reliability diminishes.

The vulnerability becomes stark in Landis's analysis: "Greece doesn't have the military power to take on Turkey and it will need to have a good relationship with Russia and hope that Russia's good offices can restrain Turkish expansionism."

Putin's Diplomatic Triumph and Russian Ascendancy

• Vladimir Putin emerges as the Middle East's premier statesman and mediator, welcomed by former American allies who now seek Russian protection and conflict resolution rather than American leadership.
• Putin's royal welcome in Saudi Arabia—the first Russian president to visit in over a decade—demonstrates how traditional American partners now court Moscow as Washington's reliability declines.
• Russian mediation capabilities extend across regional flashpoints involving Iran, Israel, Turkey, and Arab states, positioning Moscow as the indispensable power broker that America once claimed to be.
• The contrast between chaotic American withdrawal and measured Russian diplomacy enhances Putin's statesmanlike image while America "wears the dunce cap" in regional perceptions.
• Russian military intervention in Syria proved decisive while American efforts failed, demonstrating superior strategic patience and commitment compared to American inconsistency and premature withdrawal.
• Moscow's support for strongman stability over democratic transformation aligns with regional realities better than American democracy promotion, making Russia a more attractive partner for authoritarian allies.

Landis observes the role reversal: "Today President Putin of Russia is swanning around the Middle East—he's in Saudi Arabia today with a royal welcome because everybody distrusts America, everybody is looking to Putin as the statesman who can mediate their flashpoints."

The Failure of American Democracy Promotion

• American democracy promotion strategy proved fundamentally flawed because Middle Eastern societies lack the constitutional foundations and social agreements necessary for stable democratic transitions.
• The neoconservative belief that America could "speed up history" and accelerate democratic development ignored how democracy actually evolves through gradual social consensus rather than external imposition.
• Fragile states like Syria, Iraq, and Libya were held together by dictators who managed societies without agreement on basic governance rules, making regime change a recipe for civil war rather than democratization.
• The "great sorting out" process unleashed by American interventions created sectarian conflicts as Alawites, Sunnis, and Kurds fought to establish dominance rather than sharing power democratically.
• Russian predictions that regime change would lead to Islamist takeovers and civil war proved more accurate than American expectations of smooth democratic transitions and stable governance.
• American idealism about universal democratic aspirations conflicted with regional realities where ethnic and religious groups prioritized survival and dominance over pluralistic democracy.

The strategic miscalculation becomes clear: "These dictators are holding the society together—you kick them off and these interminable civil wars between Alawites, Sunnis, Kurds break out and each group tries to carve out its own state."

The Return of Multipolar Realpolitik

• The world is transitioning from American unipolarity toward 19th-century-style multipolar competition with several great powers vying for influence rather than two superpowers defining global alignment.
• Rising powers like China, resurgent Russia, and assertive regional actors like Turkey, Iran, and Saudi Arabia now project military and economic power independently of American permission or coordination.
• Alliance structures become more fluid and opportunistic as countries balance against stronger neighbors through shifting partnerships rather than permanent bloc alignment.
• The absence of two dominant superpowers creates more complex diplomatic environments where countries must navigate multiple power centers and potential conflict zones simultaneously.
• Spheres of influence re-emerge as organizing principles for regional security, with Russia dominating post-Soviet space, China asserting Pacific influence, and America retreating to core interests like the Persian Gulf.
• The rules-based international order gives way to transactional realpolitik where power relationships determine outcomes rather than international law or institutional frameworks.

Landis captures the transformation: "The world is going back to a 19th-century realpolitik where there are not two major powers around which everybody has to align, but there are many different major powers with the rise of India, China, Russia, America's shrinking footprint."

America's Strategic Crossroads: Oil, Israel, and Superpower Identity

• America's core Middle East interests center on two strategic imperatives: supporting Israel and controlling Persian Gulf oil resources that contain over 50% of known global reserves.
• The World War II lesson that controlling energy supplies determines military outcomes drives American commitment to Saudi Arabia despite moral objections, as ceding Persian Gulf influence to China or Russia would undermine superpower status.
• American Jewish community support for Democratic Party creates complex political dynamics as progressive Democrats increasingly criticize Israeli settlement policies while maintaining traditional pro-Israel positions.
• The Persian Gulf represents one of the "major tent pegs of superpower dom" that America cannot abandon without conceding global influence to rival powers who would rapidly move to fill the vacuum.
• Democratic Party divisions over both Saudi Arabia and Israel relationships threaten core pillars of post-World War II American foreign policy without offering coherent alternative strategies.
• Smart retrenchment requires maintaining essential strategic positions while limiting overextension, but chaotic withdrawal risks losing influence rapidly without proportional benefits.

The strategic bind emerges clearly: "If we concede that we're no longer gonna be [a superpower]—that's one of the major tent pegs of superpower dom, and America's at a crossroads here."

Conclusion

The Syrian withdrawal represents far more than a tactical military decision—it signals the end of the post-Cold War American-dominated global order and the emergence of a chaotic multipolar world where regional powers feel emboldened to pursue territorial expansion while traditional allies scramble to find new security guarantors.

Joshua Landis's analysis reveals how eight years of failed regime change policy culminated in strategic alignment with the very leader America sought to overthrow, while corrupt pay-to-play foreign policy processes undermined coherent strategy in favor of special interest priorities. The broader implications extend far beyond the Middle East, as European security architectures built on American guarantees face new vulnerabilities from resurgent powers like Turkey, potentially forcing traditional allies toward Russian protection.

America's challenge lies in managing inevitable retrenchment strategically rather than chaotically, maintaining core interests like Persian Gulf energy control and Israeli security while avoiding the overextension that created current crises. The transition from rules-based order to realpolitik competition offers both dangers and opportunities, but success requires acknowledging the fundamental shift from American hegemony to multipolar balance-of-power politics.

Practical Implications

• European policymakers must develop independent security capabilities and contingency plans for American withdrawal, potentially including deeper integration with non-NATO powers like Russia to balance regional threats from Turkey and other assertive neighbors
• American voters and political leaders need honest discussion about foreign policy costs and priorities, recognizing that $5 trillion in borrowed Middle East spending represents unsustainable overextension that requires strategic choices about core interests versus peripheral commitments
• Regional powers should prepare for increasingly fluid alliance structures where permanent partnerships give way to opportunistic balancing arrangements, requiring more sophisticated diplomatic capabilities to navigate multipolar competition
• International investors and businesses must account for growing geopolitical instability as rules-based trade and security frameworks erode in favor of transactional power relationships that can shift rapidly based on military and economic leverage
• Democratic societies need reforms to reduce special interest capture of foreign policy decision-making, ensuring strategic coherence based on national interests rather than donor priorities and personal business relationships