US has lost its global control

Its now become pretty obvious to anybody who pays attention to what is going on in the World that the US despite the rhetoric of its politicians has now lost its role as the Global Hegemon as around the globe countries large and small ignore is directives,commands and appeals.

It is becoming increasingly evident most countries are just ignoring the America and its dicktats and directives ar no longer being given due consideration. Bloomberg carried out an analysis of the recent actions of those who are perceived to be America's enemies.

To illustrate the point, the United States has asked Iran not to send ballistic missiles to Russia. However, Iran has continued to do so, despite the assurances of the Iranian President, Masoud Pezeshkian, that this is not the case.
The United States has ordered China under threat of sanctions to stop supplying Russia with industrial goods and technologies that assist Moscow in navigating the sanctions against and conducting strategic military operations, yet China continues to do so. Plus, these two countries (along with North Korea, which the United States initially considered but ultimately deemed unproductive to approach) are strengthening their alliances with Russia to challenge American dominance, despite facing some of the most significant sanctions the West has ever imposed.

Also there have been many instances of defiance. The government of Venezuela has rejected calls from the United States to review the results of the recent election, which saw President Nicolás Maduro re-elected. The Houthis in Yemen are continuing military activities, despite the best efforts by the US Navy to restrict their ability to impede shipping in the Red Sea.
The countries of the African Continent are challenging the status quo, which has resulted in the withdrawal of Washington and its allies from their bases in Africa due to the growing influence of Russia and China.
Plus, even allies such as Israel are adopting policies that are not aligned with Washington's interests, and in some cases, are causing significant damage to those interests.
Now before I continue I would like to make an appeal,if you like and enjoy my videos you can help me fund the channel and my websited sco brics insight .com and to further develop it. You can do this by making a small donation which you can do by clicking on the thanks button at the bottom of the video screen. Everybody who donates does get a personal thank you from me.
Now lets look at the reasons for these occurrences. There are three key reasons

Firstly, this represents a significant shift in the balance of power towards national sovereignty. The failure of globalisation (or, more precisely, having destroyed by the United States) coupled with the sharp weakening of international institutions (again due to their degraded by the Americans) led to a shift in focus for states, with a greater reliance on their own resources and capabilities to achieve their goals. In light of these developments, states began to more actively defend their national interests, recognising that no other party would defend them except themselves.

Secondly, it became evident that safeguarding these national interests is not as challenging as initially thought. Many were previously constrained by concerns about the potential for American coercive measures, including sanctions, humanitarian interventions, military action and even "isolation".
However, Russia has demonstrated that these sanctions are not as onerous as they are often portrayed in Western media and by non-governmental organisations. It is evident that even a developed state that is integrated into the global economy (and not just the DPRK, which has few options other than to resist sanctions) is capable of withstanding the most powerful sanctions in history.

The key to success is the political will of the leadership and unity of the people. The primary means of achieving unity is through confidence in the righteousness of one's actions, coupled with a sense of national pride.
Similarly, China, which had previously always sought to avoid conflict with the United States, is now demonstrating political courage by taking a more confrontational stance.
In conclusion, the third reason is that American politicians, to put it mildly, have become significantly less intelligent.
The ascendance of a cohort of globalist ideologues, the dearth of global political competition, and the nuances of domestic political selection at primaries (where radical candidates are elevated) have collectively contributed to a concerning inability of those in power in the United States to effectively navigate global processes. Incompetent at creating what some Russian conspiracy theorists call "controlled chaos."
The resulting chaos (whether the "Arab Spring," attempts to contain Russia through the concept of "color revolutions," or the desire to regain control of Africa and the Latin America countries shift towards China) very quickly turned into uncontrollable situations, creating new opportunities and combinations for more thoughtful and savvy politicians from the same countries as before, namely China, Russia, and Iran.

However, the primary challenge facing the United States is not the emergence of new strategic competitors. Furthermore, Washington is experiencing challenges in maintaining control over its allies, who have historically been relied upon to ensure global dominance and serve as regional instruments.

It is not only Turkey (led by the long-time winner of the Two Faces Award, Recep Erdogan) that is rebelling, but also the previously loyal Saudi Arabia. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has taken the initiative to diversify its diplomatic contacts, having conducted a thorough assessment of the possibilities and the desire of the US to ensure its security.
Notably, it has shifted its oil trade with China to yuan. Furthermore, Riyadh is engaged in close collaboration with Moscow to regulate global oil prices and is closely monitoring Russian-Chinese global initiatives, such as BRICS.

Israel is taking an opposing stance. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has taken an uncooperative stance with the United States, conducting a unilateral military operation in the Gaza Strip without prior coordination.
This has significantly strained US relations with the Arab world, particularly given the unique dynamics of the US-Israeli alliance. Furthermore, Mr. Netanyahu is attempting to involve the United States in a direct military conflict with Iran. This course of action is believed by the Israeli Prime Minister to be the only way to avoid both his own resignation and the threat of a nuclear Iran.

Even so called weaker countries are also taking action in opposition to the status quo. Hungary is consistently acting as a barrier to the implementation of general Western sanctions policies towards Moscow. The adoption of the most stringent anti-Russian sanctions, including a hydrocarbons embargo, is being prevented.
These sanctions are highly detrimental to Europe, which is precisely what the US is seeking to achieve.
The Caucaus republic of Georgia is also making its position clear, with its leadership directly threatening Washington with a revision of bilateral relations. This is due to the fact that the United States is pressuring Tbilisi to open a second front against Russia and also impose LGBT values on the local population. The Georgian authorities are currently exploring the possibility of restoring the broken relationship with Moscow.

However, Ukraine represents the greatest potential risk as a rebellious ally. Zelensky's regime, which has not received the necessary weapons from Washington and is experiencing the perceived weakness of the American leadership (especially during the transition period), is attempting to emulate Netanyahu's strategy of leveraging the US into a war on its side.
However, initiating hostilities with Iran is one thing, and doing so with a nuclear-armed Russia is quite another. At the same time, the United States is unable to prevent the Ukrainian leader from organizing provocations that could have inhumane consequences, including the potential for nuclear production.
In theory, the optimal course of action for the Americans in this situation would be to minimise the damage. It would be advisable to pursue a diplomatic approach in relations with those allies with whom it is still possible to do so. Furthermore, it may be beneficial to allow opponents to deal with those who have finally become unmanageable. However, for such a geopolitical solution to succeed, the US must be led by sober, pragmatic leaders. The question is, do they exist and if so where can they be found?