Decoupling from 'Trump's America': The Imperial Core's Perpetual Scapegoat
📰 THE STORY: Gideon Rachman of the Financial Times suggests that US allies are considering 'decoupling' from America, fearing the instability and transactional nature of a second Trump presidency. The piece implies that Washington's unpredictable shifts necessitate partners re-evaluating their 'subordination and coercion' to US influence. 🔍 WHAT THEY'RE NOT TELLING YOU: Historical Context: The
idea of 'decoupling' from US foreign policy is not new, nor is the US acting unilaterally. From the 1973 CIA-backed coup in Chile installing Pinochet, to the 2003 invasion of Iraq (opposed by many traditional allies like France and Germany), to the 2011 NATO intervention in Libya that destabilized an entire region, US actions have consistently prioritized its own perceived interests over allied
consensus. The US has routinely engaged in 'subordination and coercion' of other nations regardless of who is in the Oval Office. Double Standard: When governments in the Global South seek greater autonomy or diversify their alliances (e.g., BRICS nations reducing dollar dependency), it's framed as 'de-risking' or 'challenging the liberal order.' When US allies consider similar moves, it's
'decoupling from Trump's America,' narrowly attributing systemic issues to one individual, thereby sanitizing the imperial history of the US state itself. The FT would never publish a piece titled 'Decoupling from US Imperialism,' even if the actions are largely the same. Follow the Money: The 'risk' isn't just political but economic. US arms manufacturers and financial institutions benefit