The international order today is no longer shaped by classical geopolitics defined by territorial boundaries, military alliances, and traditional warfare. Instead, global power is increasingly exercised through what can be described as networked geopolitics. In this emerging paradigm, influence flows across interconnected systems of information, infrastructure, ideology, finance, and digital communication. Power now resides in the ability to shape, control, and disrupt these networks rather than merely possessing military strength or territorial size.
In this context, the United States—long the central architect of the liberal international order—faces a complex and multilayered challenge. It is not confronting a single rival, but a distributed axis of anti-American actors whose goal is to dismantle the existing global order. This axis consists of two main groups. The first is a rational authoritarian bloc led by China and Russia. It seeks to expand influence through cyber warfare, technological penetration, economic pressure, and institutional manipulation. The second is a radical ideological bloc led by Iran and Qatar. This bloc promotes an anti-Western worldview through religious mobilization, funding of political Islam, influence operations, and exploitation of civil society institutions in open societies.
Although these two blocs differ in ideology and strategy, they converge in their objective. Both seek to weaken American hegemony and redefine global norms. The rational authoritarian bloc targets structural dominance, while the ideological bloc attacks values and legitimacy. Together they create a diffuse network of resistance against the liberal democratic model.
Within this web, Iran holds a pivotal position. It is not merely a regional power with ambitions in the Middle East. It is a transnational ideological force that mobilizes proxy networks, shapes cultural and religious discourse, and challenges the status quo through both military and informational means. Iran uses a hybrid strategy. It combines hard power capabilities such as ballistic missiles and regional militias with soft power instruments like pan Shi’a ideology, digital propaganda, and diplomatic outreach. Its influence extends across Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and even into parts of Africa and Latin America, forming a resilient and adaptive structure of resistance.
Iran’s nuclear ambitions add a critical layer to this challenge. If Iran becomes a nuclear power, it could fundamentally shift the global balance. It would not only gain deterrent power but also serve as a catalyst for the emergence of a broader network of nuclear armed authoritarian regimes. A world in which China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran all possess nuclear weapons and share an interest in undermining Western power would severely restrict America’s freedom of action and diminish its credibility among allies.
On the other side of this network struggle stands Israel, one of the most critical allies of the United States. Israel is more than a regional actor. It functions as a forward defense node for the liberal world order. It combines advanced intelligence capabilities, cyber warfare expertise, and precision military action to counter Iran’s expansion and destabilization efforts. Israeli operations against Iranian nuclear infrastructure, weapons transfers, and regional entrenchment are not simply defensive. They serve a larger purpose of disrupting the formation of a hostile and cohesive anti-Western network.
Israel’s importance is also symbolic. As a democratic state with technological and economic strength in a volatile region, it represents the values and interests that underpin the American-led order. Its survival and strength directly impact the credibility and reach of the United States. Any erosion of Israeli deterrence would reverberate across the strategic web and embolden adversaries.
The contest between Iran and Israel is therefore not a simple regional rivalry; it is a conflict between two competing strategies of network-building. Iran seeks to embed itself in transnational webs of grievance, ideology, and armed resistance. Israel aims to isolate and neutralize these webs through deterrence, technology, and strategic alliances. Each actor is a key node in a wider global confrontation.
For the United States, the stakes are high. Retreating from global engagement in the name of restraint or domestic focus would leave critical nodes exposed. In a networked world, absence is filled rapidly by competitors. The vacuum left by the United States would be occupied by actors who seek to restructure the global system in their favor.
To safeguard its position, the United States must embrace a networked strategy of its own. This means more than military dominance. It involves building resilient alliances, countering malign influence operations, securing digital infrastructures, and reinforcing the legitimacy of liberal norms. It also requires targeted disruption of hostile networks where necessary, particularly those surrounding Iran’s activities.
The future of American leadership will be determined not solely in Washington or Beijing, but across interconnected theaters of influence from the Middle East to cyberspace, from the corridors of international institutions to the frontlines of regional conflicts. Recognizing this networked reality and adapting accordingly is essential for preserving stability, prosperity, and the foundational principles of the liberal international order.
