President Barack Obama has won re-election. However, in addition to all of the constraints on him that I discussed last week, he won the election with almost half the people voting against him. His win in the Electoral College was substantial -- and that's the win that really matters -- but the popular vote determines how he governs, and he will govern with one more constraint added to the others. The question is whether this weakens him or provides an opportunity. That is not determined by his policies but by the strategic situation, which, in my view, gives the United States some much-needed breathing room.

The Structure of the International System

At the moment, the international system is built on three pillars: the United States, Europe and China. Europe, if it were united, would be very roughly the same size as the United States in terms of economy, population and potential military power. China is about a third the size of the other two economically, but it has been the growth engine of the world, making it more significant than size would indicate. 

The fundamental problem facing the world is that two of these three pillars are facing existential crises, while the third, the United States, is robust only by comparison. Europe is in recession and, faced with a banking and sovereign debt crisis, is trying to reconcile the divergent national interests that were supposed to merge into a united Europe. China, dependent on exports to maintain its economy, is confronting the fact that many of its products are no longer competitive in the international market because of rising costs of labor and land. The result is increasing tension within the ruling Communist Party over the direction it should take. 

1
George Friedman

George Friedman

George Friedman is the CEO and chief intelligence officer of Stratfor, a private intelligence company located in Austin, TX.

Most Recent Articles

Join the Debate
9 Comments So Far
Mountain Rose Wrote: Nov 16, 2012 8:32 AM
BTW, did you know your column is cut in half?

Tell the webmaster something needs to be adjusted
Mountain Rose Wrote: Nov 16, 2012 8:32 AM
SUSAN RICE LIED

CHRIS STEVENS DIED

OBAMA TRIED (to blackmail Petraeus with a sexual indiscretion)

PETRAEUS TESTIFIED (at great personal cost)
Henry_VlIl Wrote: Nov 15, 2012 7:23 PM
U.S. military protection of the Persian Gulf is unnecessary to ensure access to oil from that region. Without Uncle Sam's generous help, Persian Gulf oil producers, shippers, and consumers (that latter residing mostly in Europe and East Asia) would have strong incentives to protect the free flow of oil. If the U.S. government eliminated its military subsidy for oil in the Persian Gulf, it could decommission approximately five army divisions, five active air wings of the Air Force, five Marine Expeditionary Brigades, and 144 ships, including six aircraft carriers-roughly half of the U.S. armed forces.
Henry_VlIl Wrote: Nov 15, 2012 7:23 PM
Because only 10 percent of the oil consumed by the U.S. comes from the Persian Gulf, U.S. military protection of that region is even more irrational than nineteenth century European imperialism. American taxpayers would enjoy significant savings if the U.S. were to rely exclusively on markets to obtain oil, just as Europeans became better off as their governments reduced their use of armed forces and protectionist trade policies and relied more on free markets to obtain goods from other countries. Unfortunately, the U.S. government has taken the opposite approach in recent years and has extended its security umbrella over oil-producing regions in West Africa, Latin America, the Caspian Sea region, and Central Asia.
William Gensert Wrote: Nov 15, 2012 7:03 AM
Mr. Friedman, I try not to miss any of your articles -- although I admit I missed the one last week. Something must have happened that depressed me and kept me away from my daily routine.

I particularly liked this piece. It is the best analysis I have read in quite sometime of what is happening with respect to China, America and Europe.

I wrote a similar article last December with like reasoning.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/12/americas_greatness_will_defeat_obama.html
hmcdonald Wrote: Nov 15, 2012 6:54 AM
Friedman overlooks the consequences of Obama policies aimed at reducing US energy production.
joanne206 Wrote: Nov 15, 2012 6:24 AM
I do not believe that anything you said in this article will frame obamas policies. Hate to sound like a conspiracy theorists but I believe obamas whole agenda is not only to aggrandize himself but more especially to bury the USA.
Henry_VIIl Wrote: Nov 15, 2012 3:51 AM
Thank you Tea Party for being the quickest sellouts in the history of human civilization!!!!