[Wang Son-taek] The price of disruption and arrogation

Korea Herald

26-02-2025

The United Nations Security Council adopted a resolution on the Russia-Ukraine war on Monday, and its contents are both astonishing and disappointing. The resolution demanded a swift end to the war between the two nations and called for sustainable peace. However, it failed to mention who initiated the invasion and who bears responsibility for this tragic conflict. This resolution marks a stark departure from the consistent position of Western nations over the past three years, which condemned Russia's invasion as a blatant violation of international law. Alarmingly, this shift was driven by the United States, which proposed the controversial resolution, leading to a troubling division within the Western alliance.
By ignoring the responsibility of the aggressor, the resolution inadvertently emboldens dictators and rule-breakers worldwide, who may now consider launching their own "special military operations." This situation threatens the global order that has been upheld for nearly eight decades under US leadership. At the center of this disruption stands US President Donald Trump, whose actions are dismantling the world order by excusing the invader while leaving the victimized nation without justice. This is not merely a diplomatic misstep -- it is an act of global arrogation and a profound disruption of international norms.
Trump appears to revel in his own form of diplomatic blitzkrieg, operating under the assumption that he will not be held accountable. Yet history teaches us that even great powers must pay the price for such disruption and arrogation. The United States should not expect to be an exception.
A pertinent example is the 1953 Iranian coup, which underscores how great powers have historically violated international norms for their own interests, often paying a steep price. In August 1953, Iran's democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh, a nationalist who pursued reform policies, was overthrown in a CIA-backed coup (Operation Ajax) after he nationalized a British company, the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company. Enraged by the nationalization, Britain sought US assistance to reverse the move.
The coup, orchestrated by Kermit Roosevelt Jr., the grandson of Theodore Roosevelt, succeeded in ousting Mossadegh and reinstating the Shah's authoritarian rule. This US-backed intervention deeply alienated the Iranian people, sowing seeds of anti-American sentiment that would later culminate in the 1979 Iranian Revolution. The US's hypocritical stance -- preaching democracy while undermining it abroad -- fueled widespread distrust, making America a target of animosity in the Islamic world. The 1953 coup is seen as a foundational event leading to the long-standing hostility between the US and Iran, which contributed to the volatile dynamics that eventually gave rise to events like the 9/11 attacks.
Another case of the US arrogation is the Gulf of Tonkin incident in August 1964, which led to the catastrophic Vietnam War. Initially, US involvement in Vietnam was limited, but the incidents -- where North Vietnamese forces allegedly attacked the USS Maddox -- were manipulated to justify full-scale military intervention. While the first skirmish did occur, the second attack was later revealed to be either a fabrication or a misinterpretation. Despite the dubious evidence, the US Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, granting President Lyndon B. Johnson authority to escalate military action. This led to a prolonged and bloody conflict, with over 58,000 American soldiers killed and more than 300,000 wounded. The financial toll was staggering, with costs exceeding $200 billion (over $1 trillion in today's value). Ultimately, the US withdrew from Vietnam in 1975 in a humiliating defeat, leaving the nation deeply divided and questioning its foreign policy.
The 2003 invasion of Iraq stands as another example of misguided US foreign policy driven by arrogance. The Bush administration justified the war by claiming that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction and had ties to a terrorist organization, al-Qaida -- both of which were later proven false. The true motives likely included a desire to remove Saddam Hussein, assert US dominance in the Middle East, and exact retribution post-9/11. The invasion resulted in immense human and economic costs. Thousands of American soldiers and countless Iraqi civilians lost their lives, and the conflict destabilized the region for years. The financial burden strained the US economy, contributing to the conditions that led to the 2008 financial crisis. The Iraq War eroded America's moral authority and weakened its global standing.
The recent UNSC resolution reflects a dangerous pattern in US foreign policy that dismisses historical lessons in favor of short-term strategic gains. By refusing to condemn Russia's invasion of Ukraine explicitly, the US signals to the world that power and influence can override justice and accountability. This sets a perilous precedent, potentially encouraging other regional powers to act aggressively without fear of repercussions. Such actions not only disrupt the international order but also weaken US hegemony. As America's moral leadership diminishes, other powers -- such as China and certain European nations -- may fill the vacuum, reshaping the global balance of power. The US risks isolating itself, undermining the very alliances that have sustained its global influence.
To avoid repeating past mistakes, American elites must recognize the chaos that Trump's diplomacy has unleashed and work to restore US credibility on the world stage. This will not be easy, especially given the political divisions within the country. As about half of Americans support Trump, he might be a strong leader for some time. However, halting the erosion of US global leadership is essential. Failure to do so will accelerate America's decline, leading to a loss of hegemonic power and a diminished role in international affairs. The US must learn from its history, understanding that arrogation and hubris come at a high cost -- one that could ultimately undermine its status as the hegemon.
In conclusion, the United States stands at a crossroads. It can either continue down the path of diplomatic misjudgment, risking further isolation and decline, or it can reaffirm its commitment to international norms and lead with integrity. The choice will determine not only America's future but also the stability of the global order.
Wang Son-taek is an adjunct professor at Sogang University. He is a former diplomatic correspondent at YTN and a former research associate at Yeosijae. The views expressed here are the writer's own. -- Ed.