Today if you are not American and you are cheering on the US administration's foreign policy actions, then you are cheering on the actions of an administration that is ever less recognised by the American people.

Many might say, historically, the world has been safer and more prosperous with a strong, confident US in it. They might argue this is more in line with empirical evidence than any other opposing view. Given the broad sweep of events, it perhaps mattered less whether this correlation was because of (benevolent) hegemonic stability theory or because of how, should anyone misbehave, America's sheer overwhelming power meant it could knock heads together.

Econometricians call this observational equivalence. Either way, things were better and we were safer when the US was on-side. (This despite the Kissinger joke.) But throughout that time America and its people had a consistent story. Not all US administrations were popular, but the American people always understood who they had elected. The people might disagree with their leaders, but they could provide a rational language to explain the actions of those leaders.

The way things are today, however, if you are not American and you are cheering on the US's foreign policy actions, then you are cheering on an administration that is ever less recognized by the American people. If, today, you think you are safer because America is in your world ready to protect you from bad agents, that might just be muscle memory talking. Circumstances change and you haven't kept up. The conceit that siding with America keeps you safe is now an assumption that needs to be interrogated. Clear-thinking Americans certainly see that. So do America's allies.

(The last two graphics are from Paul Krugman 2026.04.05 and 2026.03.16)