Leading the world is a complicated task, and not an easy one. This is what the US administration knows and the conclusion it has reached after 12 years of continuous wars. These wars have exhausted it financially and militarily, according to Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, who set conditions for it to retain its position of leadership. Most importantly, the United States "must not fall prey to the false notion of American decline" and must overcome the process of "looking inward" dictated by the post-war phase. President Barack Obama perhaps did not manage, despite his eloquence, to convey his message and clarify the reality his country faces, after having expended its strength invading Iraq and Afghanistan and fighting the war on terror. This is perhaps even due to his eloquence, which everyone appreciates and which some consider to be mere linguistic wordplay they fail to comprehend. Thus his Secretary of Defense has come to clarify and convey the message, to friends before rivals – those friends who blame Washington for its leniency in confronting a geostrategic event like that of Syria, and those rivals on the domestic scene who have described the President as weak, unable to confront challenges and squandering the country's position of global leadership. As for his enemies, and they are many, they have interpreted his backing down on waging direct wars, replacing them instead with soft warfare, as defeat, and have begun preparing to deal a fatal blow to the decaying American empire. The Secretary of Defense was clear. He defined his country's position and its stance on events. He stressed the importance of making use of all instruments of power, not military power alone. Indeed, no nation other than the United States "has the will, the power, the capacity, the capability, and the network of alliances to lead the international community in addressing them. However, sustaining our leadership will increasingly depend not only on the extent of our great power, but an appreciation of its limits, and a wise deployment of our influence". "Wise" is the key word here. Such wisdom had appeared in the withdrawal from Iraq and the preparations for withdrawal from Afghanistan. It also appeared in the way the Obama administration has dealt with the events in Syria and with the Iranian nuclear issue, having combined, according to Hagel, diplomatic, economic and military power, in addition to mobilizing allies to "preserve" its interests. Ever since Obama came to the White House, he has been trying to distance himself from the policies of George Bush. He has proven this in effect by turning to "soft warfare", i.e. economic embargo, the use of unmanned drones to fight terrorism, and diplomacy. Yet his allies around the world did not appreciate such a shift. Indeed, they have been developing all of their strategies, for decades, on the basis of Washington being prepared to make use of its military power to defend their shared interests. They were thus quite disappointed to see it back down on confronting Iran and the Syrian regime, preferring diplomacy to war. They were beset by doubts, perhaps for good reason, about a bargain of some kind being struck by the White House with Iran to share influence with it in the region, particularly in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq. They had been hoping to topple the Syrian regime by cooperating militarily with the US, so as for its fall to represent a strong blow against Tehran. And if the latter were to fail to back down on its ambitions, it would find itself in the line of fire. The evidence of such a bargain held by those friends of the US is that Washington and Tehran have been sharing influence in Iraq and in Afghanistan for more than ten years. As for the enemies of the United States, they have found in Obama's policies the opportunity to say that they have triumphed, and that the US is no longer the world's sole superpower. Indeed, a new alliance has emerged, stretching from Moscow to Syria through Iran – an alliance supported by the BRICS countries, and having enough economic and military power to wage a new Cold War, in addition to localized wars, under Russian leadership, to put an end to the hegemony of the United States, which has persisted since the fall of the Soviet Union. Hagel's message to friends and enemies signifies that the United States has attained "wisdom", and that it will lead the world from its new position, in collaboration with its rivals if necessary. Negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program represent an important step down this new road, and it will be followed by further steps (read: bargains) that should not surprise anyone.
