It has been two years since the US pulled out of Afghanistan.

The chaotic departure from the capital Kabul reminded many of the ignominious 1975 collapse of Saigon at the end of the Vietnam War. Critics contend that the withdrawal emboldened rivals, especially Russia and China, and encouraged smaller nations and their leaders to recalculate policies and politics.

The hasty exit also highlighted the fact that the post-World War II US-shaped global order was over. Today, as the contours of international politics continue to evolve, questions proliferate about the US’s global status and mission.

Indeed, the term “superpower” — at least as understood in the Cold War context — no longer remains operative. The US is still at the top of the international pecking order based on economic weight, cultural influence, military might, foreign aid, logistical capabilities, and network of security and trade alliances. However, policy priorities have shifted, new challenges have emerged, and Washington is having difficulty articulating and selling its strategy, denting its credibility.

The Biden administration has focused on repairing and expanding the US alliance system. The Russian invasion of Ukraine gave NATO a new sense of purpose and new members. Today, the 74-year-old alliance is bankrolling and arming Ukraine, with Washington being Kyiv’s most generous supporter. The war’s outcome remains in the balance, but it will not end, as Moscow envisioned, with the swift collapse of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s government.

Biden has also prioritised strengthening the US position in the Indo-Pacific, especially through ties to the other Quad alliance nations of Australia, Japan, and India, as well as South Korea. Washington has made commitments to Taiwan’s security as well and helped to birth the AUKUS alliance between Australia, the UK, and the US. The US Inflation Reduction Act, in actuality a massive climate bill, could very well be a global game-changer in combating climate change and pushing the nation — and world — into a greener future.

But problems are mounting on all fronts. In Latin America, democracy is threatened by left and right-wing populism. Drug gangs have been emboldened, and human rights are under strain. US-Mexican relations are more tense than they have been in years.

In the Middle East, Lebanon, Syria, Libya, and Yemen are failed states. Iraq, Morocco, and Algeria all face severe economic challenges. Egypt battles supply chain issues, including in grain, which have trigged inflation. Tunisia and Israel struggle with self-inflicted internal political crises.

Africa has witnessed a spate of coups and faces the consequences of climate change and food insecurity. In Asia, China’s economic growth, military buildup, and aggressive diplomatic outreach (especially under the Brick and Road Initiative) draws the most attention. But there are other critical concerns, such as the instability of nuclear-armed Pakistan, where floods have affected more than 33 million people. The recent arrest of former Pakistani prime minister Imran Khan continues a disturbing trend of political leaders going from high office to prison.

Climate change, extreme weather events, and pressure on the water-energy-food security nexus suggest greater government instability and human suffering. Questions abound, and are not unique to one specific region, about migration, health, the rule of law, human rights, the status of women, and religious freedom.

Meanwhile, the volatile US domestic political scene is damaging the country’s international prestige. Since 2016, it seems that there has been a continuous election season. Great or small, every policy decision seems to be a zero-sum game.

At state level, partisan control means winner takes all. Compare California and Michigan, on the one hand, to Texas and Florida, on the other — these “blue” Democratic and “red” Republican states are moving in very different directions.

At the federal level, passing critical legislation like appropriations (spending) bills and raising the debt limit is exceedingly difficult. Partisan intransigence even complicates dealing with routine matters like military promotions and ambassadorial appointments.

In an atmosphere of this sort, it is likely that Washington’s policies will shift abruptly when power changes hands. This destabilises global politics and in so doing undermines US claims to superpower status. To be a superpower, one must not only lead, but have others believe that one will act swiftly and more or less predictably.

The US has gone through moments of turmoil and uncertainty before. The end of the Nixon administration in the early 1970s occurred as it pulled back from Vietnam. The Ford and Carter administrations in the late 1970s struggled mightily to stabilise the economy, especially inflation and high petrol prices. The US standing was debated, and policy failures such as in Iran suggested its power was waning.

However, what makes the situation today different from that of the earlier period is the fact that there is no overarching global paradigm — the Cold War conflict between the US and the former USSR — that defines roles, moderates behaviour, and maintains relative order. The world is in a period of transition, and Washington must adapt to new realities. That begins by getting its house in order both at home and abroad.

The writer is executive director of the University of Central Florida Office of Global Perspectives & International Initiatives. He is also a Distinguished Visiting Scholar at American University in Cairo for the Fall 2023 Semester.

* A version of this article appears in print in the 24 August, 2023 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly