By Dr. Pshtiwan Faraj

Sulaimani, Iraqi Kurdistan, Kurdish Policy Analysis — 3 June 2026

As American influence faces growing limits, Kurdistan must prepare for a multipolar Middle East shaped by Turkey, Iran, Israel, and emerging global powers. A strategic analysis of the post-American era.

 After America? What U.S. Strategic Decline Means for Kurdistan and the New Middle East

For nearly three decades after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States occupied a position unprecedented in modern history. No rival military bloc existed. No competing economic model challenged its dominance. American policymakers spoke openly of a "unipolar moment" in which Washington would shape the international order indefinitely.

Today, that era appears increasingly fragile.

From Afghanistan to Iraq, from Ukraine to the Indo-Pacific, the limits of American power have become impossible to ignore. The United States remains the world's strongest military power, but strength is no longer synonymous with control. The global landscape is shifting toward a more fragmented and competitive order in which regional powers possess greater freedom to challenge American preferences.

For Kurdistan and the broader Middle East, this transformation may prove more consequential than any single election in Washington.

The End of the Unipolar Moment

Following the Cold War, American policymakers believed military superiority could secure a stable international order. The interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq were not merely military campaigns; they were experiments in geopolitical engineering.

Instead, they exposed a fundamental contradiction.

The United States could overthrow regimes but struggled to build sustainable political systems in their aftermath. Trillions of dollars were spent across the Greater Middle East while regional instability often deepened rather than diminished. Critics such as Tom Engelhardt argue that America's post-9/11 wars created a cycle of strategic exhaustion that weakened rather than strengthened U.S. influence.

The withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021 symbolized more than the end of a twenty-year war. It represented the collapse of a broader assumption: that American military power could indefinitely reshape distant societies.

This lesson is now influencing strategic thinking across Washington.

Multipolarity Arrives in the Middle East

As American attention increasingly shifts toward competition with China, Middle Eastern actors are adapting.

Regional powers no longer assume Washington will intervene decisively in every crisis. Instead, countries are pursuing independent strategies:

• Turkey is expanding its military footprint across northern Syria and Iraq.

• Iran continues to build networks of influence through state and non-state actors.

• Gulf states increasingly hedge between Washington, Beijing, and Moscow.

• Israel is pursuing a more autonomous regional security architecture.

• Russia, despite setbacks elsewhere, remains an influential player in Syria.

The result is a Middle East that is becoming more multipolar even before the global system fully transitions to multipolarity.

For smaller actors, this creates both opportunities and dangers.

The Kurdish Dilemma

Few political actors understand the consequences of fluctuating American engagement better than the Kurds.

For decades, Kurdish movements have relied at various times on support from larger powers. The United States has played a particularly significant role since 1991, when the establishment of the no-fly zone enabled the emergence of modern Iraqi Kurdistan.

Yet Kurdish history also demonstrates a recurring reality: great powers pursue interests, not permanent alliances.

The prospect of a less engaged America raises difficult questions for Kurdish leaders:

• Can Kurdistan maintain security without overwhelming U.S. military involvement?

• Should Erbil diversify its strategic partnerships?

• How can Kurdish institutions become more resilient against regional pressure?

• What role should indigenous defense capabilities play in future security planning?

These questions are no longer theoretical.

They are becoming central strategic challenges.

Why Turkey and Iran Are Watching Closely

No regional powers are more attentive to signs of American retrenchment than Turkey and Iran.

Both governments recognize that reduced U.S. involvement could create opportunities to expand influence.

Turkey seeks greater freedom of action in northern Syria and Iraq while positioning itself as a central power connecting Europe, the Caucasus, Central Asia, and the Middle East.

Iran, meanwhile, views any reduction in American pressure as an opportunity to strengthen its network of regional partners and militias.

For Kurdistan, the challenge lies in navigating between these competing powers without becoming dependent on either.

This requires a level of strategic sophistication that goes beyond traditional alliance management.

The Security Vacuum Problem

History demonstrates that declining hegemonic powers rarely disappear overnight.

Instead, they create periods of uncertainty.

As Washington recalibrates its role, regional actors will test boundaries. Some conflicts may intensify before a new equilibrium emerges.

This is particularly relevant for Iraqi Kurdistan.

The region remains vulnerable to:

• Drone warfare

• Missile attacks

• Economic coercion

• Political fragmentation

• Cyber threats

• Proxy conflicts

Recent regional crises have highlighted how exposed the Kurdistan Region remains to developments beyond its control.

The lesson is clear: reliance on external protection alone is insufficient.

Building Strategic Autonomy

The future does not necessarily require distancing from Washington.

Rather, it requires reducing dependence on any single external actor.

For Kurdistan, strategic autonomy could include:

Institutional Resilience

Strong institutions reduce vulnerability to external pressure.

Economic Diversification

Dependence on oil revenues creates strategic weaknesses.

Air Defense and Security Reform

Recent regional conflicts have demonstrated the growing importance of integrated defense systems.

Diplomatic Expansion

Engagement with Europe, Gulf states, and Asian powers can provide additional strategic flexibility.

National Strategic Coordination

Security, economic, and foreign policy planning should be increasingly integrated.

These reforms would strengthen Kurdistan regardless of the trajectory of American power.

The World After America?

Predictions of American collapse are often exaggerated.

The United States remains a military, technological, and economic giant. It retains unparalleled alliance networks and continues to shape global affairs.

The more important question is not whether America disappears.

It is whether America can continue to dominate the international system as it once did.

The answer increasingly appears to be no.

The emerging world will likely be characterized by competition among multiple centers of power rather than uncontested American leadership.

For Kurdish policymakers, the strategic implication is straightforward:

The future belongs to those who prepare for uncertainty rather than depend on permanence.

A generation ago, Kurdish leaders built institutions capable of surviving Saddam Hussein's Iraq.

Today, they face a different challenge: preparing Kurdistan for a world where American power remains important but no longer guarantees regional order.

The age of unipolarity is ending.

The question is whether Kurdistan is ready for what comes next.