The Eagle's Guilt: How America's Past Strength Now Feeds Global Tyranny

For decades, the United States played the role of the world's hawk—watching, intervening, and often imposing its will through military force. This legacy of intervention left behind both victories and scars, shaping a global perception of America as a reckless enforcer rather than a principled leader. The wars in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and, to some extent, Syria created a deep sense of guilt, fueling a growing desire to retreat from the world stage. The hawk, once feared, now hesitates to fly. But guilt alone does not shape history—power vacuums do. As the U.S. withdraws from its role as a global enforcer, authoritarian regimes like Russia have eagerly stepped in to fill the void. The reluctance to intervene, even in the face of blatant aggression, has emboldened these forces. Ukraine is a prime example: the U.S., haunted by the ghosts of past wars, was initially hesitant to provide military aid, fearing escalation. This hesitation sent a message—not just to Putin, but to every aspiring autocrat: America, once decisive, now second-guesses itself. Even as aid eventually flowed, it was cautious, measured—designed to prolong the fight, not to ensure victory. Contrast this with past interventions, where the U.S. poured hundreds of billions into conflicts that served far less strategic purpose. Today, the new right has shifted away from even this restrained engagement. Leaders like Trump do not reject military force entirely but weaponize it as a bargaining tool—offering protection not as a duty, but as a transaction. The alliance between the U.S. and its partners, responsible for over 33% of global trade, is now at risk of being reduced to a price tag. Yet many, particularly among the far-left and far-right, argue that this shift is a good thing—that the world does not need America to be its police. But who, then, takes its place? The answer is not a more benevolent power—it is a vacuum where the strong prey on the weak. Without deterrence, without a force willing to uphold a rules-based order, history does not move toward justice—it bends toward tyranny. A Way Forward: Strength with Principles The solution is not to return to reckless interventionism, nor to embrace isolationism out of guilt. Instead, the U.S. must forge a new doctrine—one based on selective, strategic intervention guided by principles rather than impulse. Intervention should be driven by clear objectives: Defending liberal democracies when they are under attack. Deterring expansionist regimes that seek to redraw borders by force. Upholding international stability, not for short-term gain but for long-term peace. The eagle does not swoop blindly, but watches with precision, striking only when the moment is right. The U.S. must not retreat from the world stage, but its actions must be guided by wisdom and purpose. For if the U.S. chooses to retreat, it does not leave behind a world of peace—it leaves behind a battlefield where only the strongest survive.