It's a sad fact that the Bush era will be carried into the future with the recent acts. The old strategy of "split & conquer" is tried and proven - over and over again.
Geopolitically, increasing tensions led by US strategic deployments strengthening the GIUK-line (Greenland, UK and not Iceland in this instance - but still part of the central NATO defense doctrine for US defense against the former Soviet union) and forward positions in Europe (Poland and Czech republic), as well as other states increasing their military capabilities are manifesting themselves all around the world.
The asian front seems more or less lost by the US facing China and the issue of Taiwan, while a number of asian nations turn their attention to China for increased stimuli to the economic growth.
In South-America, Venezuela is the one poised to increasing their influence the most as they are transformed by the economic boom in energy, while Brazil and Argentina take on renewed importance as agricultural producers and economic strength and independence from the IMF and World Bank. Brazil, India and Russia are collaborating on the next generation fighter jet - the Sukhoi PAK-FA.
On the european front, the recent turn of events are obviously stemming any russian growth - both economically and militarily as well as in diplomatic terms.
With regards to Afhganistan and Iraq, the US will probably reap the rewards of higher NATO attention to their needs and wants. However, there are serious issues with Pakistan - where the US has stopped several projects for funding military capabilities, the leadership is in trouble, all while it seems tensions are again rising between Pakistan and India - and probably the most dangerous zone on the planet with Kashmir.
On the Iran issue, we might see complications - although this is not in Russia's interests with the Chechen conflict still looming.
And as Israel have toned down some of the provocations, there are signs that Syria, Iran are strengthening diplomatic and economic ties - also to other neighbours in the region.
Better prepare for economic contraction that the openness we have enjoyed the last couple of decades now have seen other nations gaining importance, and the US once again asserting control for geopolitical goals.
The new US presidency could perhaps see this as a gift, or a curse - depending on what kind of political stance one adheres to. Russia has certainly changed a lot and been through some transitions since the end of the Soviet union - while the US has seemingly remained the same, and still employ the same tactics as seen throughout history with destabilized regions and conflict for asserting strategic control.
I wonder if the world have been changing so much, that the old mass media controls that were previously enjoyed by the superpowers now is void and economic progress around the world has taken on a growth that spurs the forerunners into economic territory where they become virtually untouchable by the US. It certainly seems the case with Brazil, India, China - and Russia as well. While Europe seems stuck between growing alongside the US and Russia - or rather - between the two -- I wonder what is best for Europe?
Fundamentally, I don't perceive Russia as a threat in the near/medium term for Europe - and I think the developing democracy is what is important - not the entrenchment encouraged by the latest conflict and geopolitical bigwig game. For those who are supporters of global Laissez-faire and straight capitalism - this is a sad turn of events, but for those clinging to protectionism - it's probably too late for changing opinions in the US and the run-up for this election - as media is no doubt very negative towards any growth potential or economic ties with Russia - seen as potentially dangerous and now "a potent enemy ready to strike against liberty itself".
Well, accountability is one thing that is sadly lacking in today's democracies. Maybe we can figure it out some day - hopefully.
