A few days ago, Anthony Blinken, Joe Biden's Secretary of State, launched a campaign against the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the court's prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, because the court intends not to investigate American soldiers, as Americans - from the American point of view - are above international law to begin with, but the court's intention to investigate possible crimes against humanity in the Palestinian territories. Rather, the court intends to investigate possible crimes against humanity in the Palestinian territories, noting that the court did not single out the Israeli occupation for indictment, but treated the perpetrator (the Israeli occupation) and the victim (Palestinian civilians) with the same standard, but as the Arab proverb says, "the suspicious almost say take me."

This comes amidst statements and counter-statements between US President Biden and his staff on one side and Iranian President Rouhani and his staff on the other. The reason is that Biden, who claimed that he would correct Trump's mistakes and restore the world's confidence in the United States, starting with returning to the Paris Climate Agreement, did not return to the nuclear deal with Iran as quickly and smoothly as before, given that he and his European allies had spent years of negotiations to reach it, but preferred to talk about further negotiations amid the sanctions imposed by his "reckless" predecessor, Trump. Where is the correction in Biden's policies and what is new in them? He also did the same with the agreement signed by his predecessor with the Afghan Taliban, which he announced that he would renegotiate as well.

As for the assassination of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, after many sound and smoke bombs, the US threats to publish the CIA report, which supposedly implicates the Saudi crown prince in the crime, only resulted in a lackluster report that did not add much to what was known about the case, which many observers interpreted as an extension of Trump's blackmail and "milking" policy with Saudi Arabia. This puts us in front of the fear that Biden will be a shadow of Trump, not a shadow of Obama, as many feared when he was running for president.

Biden's policies do not seem to realize that the world is changing rapidly, or perhaps it has already changed. He still wants to practice the same old American policies and the same old methods, something that time has proven is no longer as effective as it was yesterday.

Biden's policies do not seem to realize that the world is changing rapidly, or perhaps it has already changed. He still wants to practice the same old American policies and the same old methods, something that time has proven is no longer as effective as it was yesterday. The power that propelled the United States from World War I and II to the world stage and consolidated its position after the collapse of the Soviet Union is fading.

Europe, which once ruled the world, is now a country of limited influence for its own reasons and for other reasons, some of which are related to American behavior. Some regional powers that lost much of their influence during the two world wars are recovering and aspiring to play larger roles, and this is perhaps one of the main reasons for Western discomfort with Iran and Turkey, especially the latter. Indeed, this annoyance almost reaches hysteria whenever Europe sees a Turkish move that could remotely suggest an increase in Turkish power or an increase in its role in the region. In addition to the fact that it will necessarily be at the expense of the Israeli occupation, it means that Turkey will become the largest power in the Mediterranean, especially with the decline of the Egyptian role, so that Europe will be between the jaws of two pincers; Russia from the north and Turkey from the south.

In the same context, it seems that the West's longstanding reliance on the contradictions between Turkey, Russia, and Iran is no longer an effective policy. Turkey has only been subjected to the heavy shadow of US sanctions for the sake of a better relationship with Russia, represented by its insistence on purchasing the Russian S-400 air defense missile system, even if it cost it its participation in the F-35 project. Moreover, a few days ago, for example, the Turkish president stated at the summit of the Economic Cooperation Organization that "lifting sanctions on Iran will contribute to the revival of the region's economy," knowing that Turkey had previously opposed the imposition of US sanctions on Iran. We have also started to hear Turkish statements that suggest that Turkey could shift its sails towards China, and the visit of Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi to Ankara on the 25th of this month may come in this context.

Is Washington's policy of wielding the sanctions cudgel smart and effective, or does it stem from overestimated self-esteem?

A very important question arises here: Is Washington's policy of using the cudgel of sanctions smart and effective, or does it stem from an exaggerated self-esteem? The United States, which imposed sanctions on Iran, also imposed them on Turkey, Russia and China, albeit for different reasons. The U.S.'s utilitarian behavior toward the Doha Peace Agreement in Afghanistan and its opposition to a $1.5 billion dollars, consisting of 30 Turkish ATAK attack helicopters to Pakistan, could be considered a blow to Pakistani interests. Does this mean that the US sanctions and measures will push these countries closer to each other, perhaps towards a "coalition of the afflicted," and then we can imagine a "Chinese competitor" armed with privileged relations with Pakistan, Russia, Iran and Turkey? If this really happens, how will Washington confront this situation? Then who are Washington's potential allies, and it has received a painful blow in terms of credibility during the Trump cycle, especially since Biden's behavior - as we have seen - does not reflect until today a radical difference from his predecessor, are the countries of the old continent, as the United States used to call Europe? Is India, which is caught between the jaws of the Chinese-Pakistani pincers, capable of entering a confrontation of this kind for Washington?

Returning to the "graveyard of empires" Afghanistan, in which America fought a war for 19 years, during which it spent at least an estimated amount of at least one trillion US dollars, in addition to the loss of tens of thousands of American soldiers dead and wounded, in addition to the losses of its allies from the Kabul government forces, and tried all the methods devised by the best American military and political minds, then reached the conviction that ending "The Endless War," as Trump described it, is the only solution, even if at the expense of its dignity and its allies in Kabul.

Talking today as if the Biden administration has more effective and smarter solutions than the Trump administration is a case of "trial by fire"

This result did not come as an American handout to the Afghan people, or in a moment of Trumpian enthusiasm, but after drinking the Afghan poison for almost 20 years, until it became the longest and most expensive war in US history. Therefore, US diplomacy is traveling a forced corridor that cunningly passes through Islamabad, Doha and even Ankara, and tries to drag the Afghan rejectionist forces, led by the Taliban, to a solution that can be swallowed by the US, even with concessions at the expense of the allied Kabul government.

Today's talk as if the Biden administration has more effective and intelligent solutions than the Trump administration, is a matter of smartness and "trial by fire", and represents further delving into the dangerous Afghan quagmire. This comes at a sensitive stage in the life of the United States of America, in which the scales of foreign policy and domestic stability have been disturbed, and could drag America to the "graveyard of empires" where it will take a special place next to the Soviet Union and the "empire from which the sun never sets" and others that history no longer remembers, and how many opponents would be happy to see it slide towards this fate.