This is what I am seeing in the decision-making of political leaders in the West – including Andy Burnham and his Ministers.

This observation is made as a Poltical Science graduate of a top 5 UK school of Political Science – which is the capacity in which this post is written, as I am not writing it in any professional capacity. All opinions are my own, and I invite you to draw your own conclusions based upon the geopolitical logic set out below.

When leaders substitute a rule-based ‘utopian fantasy’ for the ‘raw mechanics’ of ‘state power’, they miscalculate adversaries, overextend resources, and accelerate the decline of their own global influence.

‘Realism’ dictates that in an ‘anarchic’ world, states act out of ‘self-interest’, ‘security’, and ‘power’; ignoring this reality does not make it disappear, it merely ensures that policy is built on a foundation of ‘wishful thinking’.

The policy consequences of these two distinct intellectual failures manifest across several critical areas.

(i) The Death of Strategic Thinking:

Strategic thinking requires balancing long-term national objectives with finite resources while predicting the multi-step countermoves of global rivals. Without it, foreign policy degenerates into short-term, reactionary crisis management.

Policies are driven by immediate domestic political cycles, media narratives, and emotional public responses rather than cold, multi-decade planning.

Leaders commit to ‘grand objectives’ (e.g., ‘the total defeat of strategic adversaries’ or ‘global democracy promotion’) without the economic infrastructure, industrial manufacturing capacity, or public willpower to sustain them.

The West simultaneously alienates multiple major powers (e.g., driving Russia and China into a tight strategic alliance) instead of practicing classic ‘diplomatic balancing’ to keep adversaries ‘divided’. This has resulted from the geopolitical incompetence of the ruling political, foreign policy and military elite – because it appears that they do not understand ‘Balance of Power Politics’, i.e. how the world actually works.

Red lines are drawn and crossed without consequence, destroying credibility. Adversaries quickly learn that Western rhetoric is decoupled from the actual political will to use force or endure economic pain.

(ii) The Rejection of Realism – The Cost of Ideological Delusion:

‘Classical realism’ views international relations as a ‘competitive’ arena where sovereign states seek survival and dominance. Western policymakers educated in post-Cold War liberal internationalism often view this framework as obsolete, leading to critical miscalculations in a multipolar system.

Policymakers assume that all nations secretly desire liberal democracy and free markets. They view civilizational rivals (like China, Russia, or Iran) as ‘revisionist actors’ who just need to be brought into the system, rather than sovereign empires with fundamentally irreconcilable security interests.

Realism highlights that one nation’s defensive expansion is always viewed as an offensive threat by its neighbors. Lacking this understanding, Western leaders view an adversary’s aggressive pushback against security encirclement (such as NATO expansion or Pacific alliances) as inexplicable ‘madness’ rather than predictable, rational state behavior.

Believing that globalization had permanently replaced geopolitics, Western states weaponised the global financial system (sanctions, asset seizures) assuming it would force compliance. Instead, it incentivised the multipolar world to build parallel, sanction-proof financial architectures, permanently diluting Western economic leverage.

Diplomacy is treated as a lecture series where the West judges the morality of other states. By replacing transactional diplomacy (‘What do you want, and what can we trade?’) with moral condemnation, the West shuts down the very communication channels needed to prevent accidental escalations.

By treating international relations as a moral play rather than a balance of power, Western policymakers fall victim to hubris. They mistake their own cultural preferences for universal laws. In a multipolar world characterized by the rise of non-Western powers who unapologetically practice ‘Realpolitik’, the continuation of ideological, short-sighted statecraft ensures that the West will continue to be ‘blindsided’ by global shifts, overcommit its military, and systematically misjudge the resilience of its competitors.

Are we being led by geopolitically illiterate fools? – What do you think ..

See – ‘John Mearsheimer: Russia & Iran – The West’s Escalation Trap’:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jxda4WTcbc

Russia Directly Threatens British Military Bases /Steve Jermy & Lt Col Daniel Davis