> Or is this a cumulative, distributed effort that benefits all of us?
This. There are a few theories of geopolitics, one of the most successful being ones we be bunch under an umbrella called realism [1]. (The others are idealism [2] and liberalism [3]. Historia Civilis made a great three-part video series on these [4]. Note that Realpolitik [5], which relates to realism as its praxis, is not the same thing.)
One of the consequences of realism is balance of power theory, which “suggests that states may secure their survival by preventing any one state from gaining enough military power to dominate all others” [6].
What is to be won? Not being dominated; ideally: less war, since war is irrational. (See: Ukraine.) Does preventing others from dominating you prevent you from dominating others? No. Is it necessary to win? No. But that means ceding sovereignty and increasing the chances of violent conflict as geopolitical fault lines reälign.
A note on liberalism: it works. But it requires great power at its centre. America was that benevolent great power. Now it seems we don’t want to be. The power America has to hurt its allies, and the incentives to reap that advantage, is the consistent failure mode of liberal foreign-relation structures, since the days of the Delian League.
This. There are a few theories of geopolitics, one of the most successful being ones we be bunch under an umbrella called realism [1]. (The others are idealism [2] and liberalism [3]. Historia Civilis made a great three-part video series on these [4]. Note that Realpolitik [5], which relates to realism as its praxis, is not the same thing.)
One of the consequences of realism is balance of power theory, which “suggests that states may secure their survival by preventing any one state from gaining enough military power to dominate all others” [6].
What is to be won? Not being dominated; ideally: less war, since war is irrational. (See: Ukraine.) Does preventing others from dominating you prevent you from dominating others? No. Is it necessary to win? No. But that means ceding sovereignty and increasing the chances of violent conflict as geopolitical fault lines reälign.
A note on liberalism: it works. But it requires great power at its centre. America was that benevolent great power. Now it seems we don’t want to be. The power America has to hurt its allies, and the incentives to reap that advantage, is the consistent failure mode of liberal foreign-relation structures, since the days of the Delian League.
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realism_(international_relat...
[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idealism_in_international_re...
[3] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism_(international_re...
[4] https://youtu.be/CH1oYhTigyA
[5] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realpolitik
[6] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balance_of_power_(internatio...