Sometimes things happen that cannot be explained normally. Clichés are useful in understanding cases that are difficult to pin down through cause, action, and effect. Reflecting the ground reality of the relationship between unequal countries, the much-quoted saying of the Greek historian Thucydides in the context of the Peloponnesian War is still relevant after almost 2500 years - "The strong do what they can, the weak suffer what they do".

In 1848, British Prime Minister Lord Palmerston clarified the opinion of strong nations in international relations to the Parliament - 'We have no permanent allies, and no permanent enemies. Only our interest is permanent and it is our duty to promote it.' The United States and Ukraine are equally independent and sovereign nations. The continuing disparity between their abilities is clearly visible. The priority of these types of relationships became determined by the stronger party.

As America's changing priorities become more apparent in the coming days, no one will be immune to its global impact. Perhaps that's why Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was kicked out of the White House in disgrace, which is shocking all the countries of the world.

Ukraine's strategic location was considered useful for US power when it was at odds with Russia to protect the interests of Europe as a whole. Now, due to various internal and external reasons, the economic and political forces of America want to strengthen their relations with Russia.

That's why President Donald Trump, who successfully entered the White House for the second time and legally 'captured power' in the United States, intends to please his close friend, Russian President Vladimir Putin, by throwing a Ukrainian-style pot. The 'stage show' staged inside the Oval Office of the White House on February 28, which some American commentators call a tectonic shift, is nothing like that.

Although the show of power by shaking a relatively weak ally may seem pointless, the move may have appealed to the insecure Americans associated with the so-called 'MAGA' campaign with the attitude of their political gang leader. 

Allies, including Europeans, who are naturalizing the shelter of the American security umbrella, will be forced to increase their defense budgets. As the US continues to dominate the production capacity of advanced military equipment, its market will expand rapidly. President Trump, Vice President J.D. Vance, and billionaire Elon Musk, who serves almost as co-president, are shrewd businessmen, not clowns, no matter how much they swagger.

A dialogue from Shakespeare's play "Hamlet" has become a proverb in the English language - "Method in the Madness." The suspicion that a well-thought-out economic-political action plan may be hidden in President Trump's non-diplomatic behavior, which seems suspicious on the surface, is not unfounded.

The meeting between US President Trump, Vice President Vance and Ukrainian President Zelensky, which turned into a shouting match inside the Oval Office, was clearly sponsored for public display, President Trump himself claimed - 'It's going to be bad television.' The plan to invite President Zelensky and humiliate him in front of the television cameras was very carefully planned.

There is no doubt that US accusations that Ukraine is 'gambling to lead to World War III' are baseless, provocative and disrespectful. The question that President Zelensky did not show enough gratitude for the help was insulting to the guest. To the foreign guest who is the head of state, 'Why are you not wearing a suit? What else can the purpose of sponsored questions like Do you have a suite? Through its disgraceful treatment of President Zelensky, America's immoral power has sent an unmistakable message to the rest of the world—those who plead to renege on old commitments should be prepared to be humiliated as the priorities of America's strategic interests change. 

In large, rich, powerful or influential countries, the internal situation affects their foreign policy. For small, impoverished, weak or peripheral countries, there is no choice but to assess the international balance of power and the geopolitical situation and modify their internal policies accordingly. The International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, which helped to implement the 'Washington Consensus' based on fiscal discipline, tax reform, financial liberalization, trade liberalization, reduction of state involvement in the market and extensive privatization, may now retreat.

The United States had already left the Bretton Woods collective international currency exchange system linked to the market price of gold in the 1970s. President Trump has rejected the alternative common currency concept brought to the discussion by the BRICS countries due to the international obligation of the US dollar, which depends on the credibility of the US economy. The 'Beijing Consensus' based on controlled politics, directed economics and aggressive diplomacy has not yet replaced the 'Washington Consensus'. It is not without reason that the world economic and political environment has become very fluid. 

Decisive intervention in the First World War, participation in the Treaty of Versailles and heralding the nationalist era by blowing the trumpet against colonialism, the foundation of the world order of Washington hegemony was laid in 1919, called the 'American Century'. Although the Yalta summit held in 1945 to discuss the end of World War II and the future of Europe divided the world into Western and Soviet spheres of influence, the power to challenge America's scientific, economic, cultural and diplomatic attraction could not be developed for almost half a century.

For some time the Americans were established as the only world power in the world. The suicide terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 may be seen as the first sign that the American century was coming to an end. Since then, the invincibility of the US military system has yet to be established. The economic recession that lasted from late 2007 to mid-2009 exposed the sensitivities and weaknesses of the continental-sized United States to the world.

America's strategic thinkers, who understand that tall buildings take time to crumble, may have been shocked by China's miraculous rise. Since the start of his second term, President Trump's decisions have clearly reflected declining self-confidence among the majority of white Americans, growing anxiety about the future, growing hatred of immigrants, anger at a shrinking established elite, and, to some extent, fear of a new strategic rival, China.

Europeans are reawakening their lost confidence by showing solidarity with Ukraine. China is quietly watching the rift developing between the West. Countries like Australia, Canada and New Zealand are waiting for European leadership. Insecurity towards Japan and South Korea may have increased. New Delhi's strategists may be weighing the necessity of normalizing relations with China under the new circumstances.

Analysts and experts of Nepali diplomacy skilled in the art of anticipatory obedience are probably busy assessing the wishes of the leaders of the ruling party before publicizing their views. Intellectuals who tend to form opinions by understanding the intentions of donors may be on the run.

As the (un)social media continues to dominate, the 'Impact of the USAID shutdown' has become an important topic in the public sphere. In the e-mail of the columnist, there has been a flood of links with titles such as 'Donald Trump after removing the mukundo of Nepali leader' and 'Intellectual sector swayed by dollars, who is killing religion and imposing federalism'. Economic poverty and poverty of thought are inextricably linked. The Nepali Army has shown the priority to study the effect of changing geopolitics on Nepal.

Perhaps the major political parties are also debating to increase the political will to deal with the evolving situation. Nepali spokespersons of the Washington Consensus, who have been active in shaping public opinion for a long time, must have been most anxious.

Disputed past

As some commentators say, 'Trumpism', which determines foreign policy by focusing on its strategic interests rather than any argument, theory or ideal, is not a new distortion, but has always been a fundamental trend of American power. The 'Monroe Doctrine', promulgated by President James Monroe in 1823, warned European powers not to interfere in the American continents and stated that any such action would be viewed as hostility. The Monroe Doctrine, which is still the cornerstone of American foreign policy, deepened the feeling of "poor Mexico, how far from God, how close to America" ​​in its neighbors.

At a glance, through the Paris Peace Conference of 1919, President Budrow Wilson wanted to promote the 'League of Nations' preamble for the disintegration of European empires and freedom from war with the concept of national self-determination, but within that, the desire to establish American supremacy through freedom of maritime transportation and free trade was also inherent.

After the First World War, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor in Hawaii and provided America with an opportunity to expand its dominance in Europe after the Second World War to Asia. The first and so far the last inhuman act in human history can be considered the destructive use of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. After that, the United States became the dominant power of the Asian continent along with Europe. Even the division of Korea and the ignominious end of the Vietnam War could not shake the American hegemony in Asia. President Zelensky is neither the first nor likely to be the last to be milked after

utility. President Syngman Rhee of South Korea, Nguyen Van Thieu of South Vietnam, Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines, and the last Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, who were "thrown for dead" believed in the commitment of the Americans. The relatively modern ruler of Iraq, Saddam Hussein, who was instigated by the US to control the conservative power of Islamic Iran, was eventually dragged down a 'rabbit hole' and ignominiously killed by the US.

Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai was deployed to 'build the nation' in Afghanistan, he had no choice but to flee overnight after the US decided to hand over power to the Taliban. The main reason why America's desire to be a gotie to the elected, nominated, or military rulers of weak countries, no matter how swindled, is that Americans prefer to align themselves with local elites rather than the common people. Mangge invests with an open hand and does not pressure to show any return other than loyalty. 

After 1945, after Britain slowly withdrew its hands from South Asia, the ruling elite of Nepal began to seek refuge in Washington because of the relatively elite-centered diplomacy of the Americans. In 1947, when President Harry S. Truman announced the principle of providing political, military and economic assistance to all democratic countries threatened by external or internal authoritarian forces, the process of establishing diplomatic relations with the 'internal authoritarian ruler' of Nepal began. After India's independence in 1947, the establishment of communist power in China in 1949, Pakistan's founding leader Muhammad Ali Jinnah's boastful declaration that 'America needs Pakistan more than Pakistan needs America', the occupation of Tibet by China around 1950 and the flight of the Dalai Lama from Lhasa in 1960, Nepal's strategic importance for the Cold War was lost.

BP Koirala's reluctance and King Mahendra's immediate consent to take action against China was probably one of the many reasons for the royal-military coup of 1960. There is no doubt that the autocratic rule of the Shahs in the name of Panchayat lasted for three decades only because of American support. As the 1970s began, with ping-pong diplomacy, Kissinger's secret visit to China and President Nixon's joining hands with Chairman Mao, Nepal's celestial neighbors and northern neighbors made the imperial power invincible for a while. 

Uncertain future

Nepal has continued its policy of taking Ukraine's side in the United Nations General Assembly. By voting against the resolution "Development of a comprehensive, just and sustainable peace in Ukraine", the US has firmly stood by Russia along with countries like North Korea and Belarus. India and China have remained neutral, probably because of the belief that why should they get caught up in Europe-centered futile entanglements.

No matter how much the ideals and principles are given, behind every diplomatic choice in international relations there is or is being some scene and some pseudo-transaction. It seems, Nepal's hardliners are slowly getting frustrated with the recent moves of US diplomacy. The Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) grant programs worth 500 million dollars, signed by Nepal, have been suspended and the future of the projects under it has become uncertain.

USAID staff who were asked to immediately remove their belongings from the office, no one knows when they will be able to return to work. The unintended consequences of the suspension of US aid may be more worrying than expected for Nepal.

Britain has announced a reduction in foreign aid, showing the need to increase defense spending. Other donors, such as Japan and Germany, may adopt a similar approach. The drying up of foreign aid means that those involved in Kathmandu's consulting business and gas enterprise, rather than the government, are forced to fish like fish without water. His preoccupation could lead to political upheaval.

According to purchasing power parity, China's economic weight is significant, but in real terms, America is still ahead. It may take a long time for China to surpass the US in terms of military capabilities and global presence. If a hegemonic power is replaced by another one, the resulting instability is temporary. The Chinese do not yet appear to be able or willing to take America's place in world politics.