IS Becomes WAS
Introduction
For a long time, the United States played two roles at once in the global system.
It was both the King and the Queen.
The King represents legitimacy, rules, and the position everyone instinctively protects.
The Queen represents power, speed, and decisive action.
For decades, America carried both roles simultaneously.
But that balance appears to be breaking.
From King and Queen to Queen Alone
Until recently, the United States functioned not only as the most powerful actor, but also as the rule-maker of the international system.
When America moved, allies followed.
When America spoke, rules formed.
That is the role of the King.
Today, however, the United States increasingly looks like it is retaining only the role of the Queen.
Powerful, fast, and capable of dramatic moves — but no longer the piece that others instinctively defend.
This suggests that America may be losing its position as the shared rule-maker, even if its raw power remains intact.
Venezuela: Gambit or Piece Loss?
The recent intervention in Venezuela is often framed as a gambit — a deliberate sacrifice meant to gain strategic advantage.
But there is another possibility.
What if this move is not a gambit at all, but simply a piece loss?
If Venezuela turns out to be a costly, hard-to-govern position rather than a controllable one, then the timeline the U.S. government is likely assuming — political, financial, and geopolitical — will collapse.
A gambit only works if it leads to compensation.
A piece loss merely accelerates fatigue.
Chess Thinking in a Non-Chess World
The word gambit itself reveals something important.
It evokes chess — and with it, a two-player mindset.
America versus China.
One board. One opponent.
But the world may no longer be structured that way.
Rather than a simple U.S.–China confrontation, the global system may be evolving into a three-way structure, where Europe, ASEAN, and other regional powers act as independent players rather than passive spectators.
In such a board, two-player strategies fail.
Why the World May Not Support a Rampaging Queen
Even if America continues to act forcefully as a Queen, global support is no longer guaranteed.
One reason is memory.
Many countries still carry the bitter experience of last year’s tariff wars.
Those episodes made it clear that power could be applied unilaterally — even against partners — without sufficient regard for shared costs.
As a result, the world has become cautious.
A Queen acting alone, no matter how strong, is not something others are willing to protect.
IS Becomes WAS
This is not a declaration of hostility toward America.
Nor is it a celebration of decline.
It is simply an observation of role change.
“America is King” becomes “America was King.”
America remains powerful.
But power alone is not kingship.
Kings are protected.
Queens are evaluated.
And the world appears to have quietly made that distinction.
Conclusion
The danger is not that America is weak.
The danger is that America may exhaust itself by acting alone in a system that no longer treats it as the King.
A transition to a more distributed, structural form of global governance — one that reduces the cost of unilateral action and prevents self-destruction — would benefit not only the world, but America itself.
Before exhaustion becomes collapse,
IS must recognize that it is becoming WAS.
Additional Thought
Reciprocal tariffs are often discussed as a tool of American leverage.
However, from a fairness perspective, reciprocal tariffs are not a special privilege of the United States.
If one country imposes tariffs, the counterpart logically retains the same right to respond.
Reciprocity, by definition, cuts both ways.
Seen from this angle, last year’s tariff conflicts were not merely economic disputes, but moments when many countries were reminded that power could be exercised without sufficient mutual consideration. That memory still matters.
As a result, when trade pressure is framed as unilateral authority rather than shared rules, trust erodes.
And without trust, even justified actions lose support.
In a world moving away from a single rule-maker, reciprocity is no longer a command — it is a negotiation.