The U.S. elected its new president on Tuesday. When this article went to print, the voting process was not over yet. But it does not matter in the least; regardless of whether Democrat Hillary Clinton or Republican Donald Trump has been elected, the hegemony crisis which the U.S. has been spearheading since 2008 will not end but further escalate. Neither presidential candidates are quite different from each other in terms of qualifications. This is why the U.S. witnessed the dullest election campaign ever. Both Clinton and Trump conducted their election campaigns as two presidential candidates who were stripped of their qualifications and characteristics.
In fact, this is not only because of the U.S. but also of the system itself. We clearly see that there is great exhaustion. Now, two reserve currencies, the dollar and euro, are shouldering the world economy and there are two central banks, the U.S. Federal Reserve (Fed) and the European Central Bank (ECB), behind them. Neither of them are hard currencies which are based on gold or silver. The dollars that the Fed printed so far were based on the U.S.'s bullying, with the U.S. army showing presence off the shore of all important trade ports at certain intervals, having bases in all hot spots around the world and carrying intense military operations in these regions as if a war was on the horizon. This was the result of Pax Americana and was led by the dollar's hegemony (peace) that was created through a continuous threat of war. This hegemony collapsed when the U.S. foresaw the collapse and started the invasions in Vietnam in the early 1970s.
When former U.S. President Richard Nixon removed the dollar's dependency on gold in 1971, he laid the foundations of the current crisis and stalemated the system. This started with the Vietnam War and continued with the 1973 oil crisis, civil wars, coups, rebellions and a continuous state of crisis in eastern and southern parts of the world. When this crisis firstly hit the twin towers on Sept. 11, 2001, then President George W. Bush thought that he would be able to respond to it with attacks and invasions as Nixon did in Vietnam. This attack created more abnormalities which would intensify the 2008 crisis for the global system. Indeed, these abnormalities were the embodiment of the failed hegemony.
There were considerable economic policy differences in democrats and republicans until the second tenure of Barack Obama. But the U.S.'s crisis has gotten to such a phase that these differences are no longer great enough to worth discussing. This situation also corresponds to a hegemony crisis and loss that is also identified by the U.S. itself.
The following scenario in the National Intelligence Council's (NIC) report titled "Global Trends 2030: Alternative Worlds," explains this very well:
"The world of 2030 will be radically transformed from our world today. By 2030, no country – whether the U.S., China, or any other large country – will be a hegemonic power. The diffusion of power among countries and from countries to informal networks will have a dramatic impact by 2030, largely reversing the historic rise of the West since 1750, restoring Asia's weight in the global economy, and ushering in a new era of ‘democratization' at the international and domestic level. Meanwhile, the economies of Europe, Japan and Russia are likely to continue their slow relative declines." The report reveals the U.S. hegemony will end, the West rise of the past five centuries will end and Asia will re-achieve its significance in the international arena.
In his "Capital in the 21st Century" French economist Thomas Piketty's analyses confirm this report. He says the current crisis matures the process in terms of production for a new Eastern development, continuing, "From 1900 to 1980, 70–80 percent of the global production of goods and services was concentrated in Europe and America, which incontestably dominated the rest of the world. By 2010, the European–American share had declined to roughly 50 percent, or approximately the same level as in 1860. In all probability, it will continue to fall and may go as low as 20-30 percent at some point in the 21st century. This was the level maintained up to the turn of the 19th century and would be consistent with the European–American share of the world's population. In other words, the lead that Europe and America achieved during the Industrial Revolution allowed these two regions to claim a share of global output that was two to three times greater than their share of the world's population simply because their output per capita was two to three times greater than the global average. All signs are that this phase of divergence in per capita output is over and that we have embarked on a period of convergence."
The U.S. elections will not change this reality. But the new president will shift the weight that Obama gave to the Pacific region to Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Caucasus. Therefore, as is now, the U.S. will go to all lengths to prevent axis powers like Turkey and China from being a partner to the new hegemony. Regardless of who has been elected in the U.S., our region will achieve peace not thanks to the U.S., but despite the U.S.