Luckey argues that US foreign policy is shifting away from direct military intervention. The new, more effective strategy is to arm allies, turning them into "prickly porcupines" that are difficult to attack. This approach maintains US influence and economic benefits while avoiding the political and human cost of deploying troops.

Twenty years ago, globalization and open markets (geopolitical tailwinds) created new opportunities for businesses. Today, rising nationalism, trade barriers, and security concerns act as headwinds, creating obstacles and increasing the complexity of international operations.

Beyond the US-China rivalry, a new front is opening between Brussels and Beijing. Incidents like the French suspension of fashion retailer Shein are not isolated but symptomatic of growing European mistrust and a willingness to take action. This signals a potential fracturing of global trade blocs and increased regulatory risk for Chinese firms in the EU.

When trade policies force allies like Canada to find new partners, it's not a temporary shift. They build new infrastructure and relationships that won't be abandoned even if the political climate changes. The trust is broken, making the economic damage long-lasting and difficult to repair.

After WWII, the U.S. used its naval dominance to guarantee global trade. In exchange for writing its allies' security policies, it allowed open access to its market. This economic "unfairness" was the strategic cost of building a global coalition against the Soviet Union, effectively bribing nations into an alliance.

Geopolitical shifts mean a company's country of origin heavily influences its market access and tariff burdens. This "corporate nationality" creates an uneven playing field, where a business's location can instantly become a massive advantage or liability compared to competitors.

Anne Applebaum highlights a disturbing shift where high-stakes foreign policy, like the Ukraine peace plan, is conducted by businesspeople seeking personal financial gain. This mirrors the kleptocratic systems of autocratic states, prioritizing private profit over national or allied interests, and raises questions about who American foreign policy truly serves.

Geopolitical adversaries with long-term leadership, like Iran, view the U.S.'s frequent changes in administration as a temporary inconvenience rather than a fundamental policy shift. They see the U.S. as an "obnoxious guy on the bus" whom they can simply ignore and outlast by staying their course.

A historical indicator of a superpower's decline is when its spending on debt servicing surpasses its military budget. The US crossed this threshold a few years ago, while China is massively increasing military spending. This economic framework offers a stark, quantitative lens through which to view the long-term power shift between the two nations.