In many ways the United States is a great country. Since the 19th century it has maintained its position as the largest economy in the world. It still accounts for roughly a quarter of the world GDP as it has done with some variations over the past century. Despite the slowing down of the US economy and the rapid growth of China, the latter will catch up with the US economy in dollar terms only by the middle of the 21st century even if the present trends are maintained. But the US GDP per capita will still remain far ahead of that of China both in dollar terms and in terms of purchasing power parity. Despite the current financial crisis, the US economy remains dynamic, highly competitive and a leader in the development of new technologies. It dominates such industries of the future as nanotechnology and biotechnology. Fareed Zakaria points out in his book The post-American world that higher education is Americas best industry. Eight of the top ten universities in the world are in the US. The US spends 2.6 percent of its GDP on higher education as against 1.2 percent in Europe and 1.1 percent in Japan. The American military power dominates on land, at sea and in the air and space. The US military expenditure accounts for almost 50 percent of the global defence spending. In short, the US is the sole superpower among many great powers. But the global order is changing. While the US is likely to remain the most powerful country in the world in the foreseeable future, it is faced with several emerging challengers, the most important of whom is China which has recorded economic growth rates of over 9 percent a year for almost 30 years. The size of the Chinese economy has doubled every eight years for three decades. In dollar terms, the Chinese economy is now the third largest in the world. As a result of huge trade surpluses year after year, Chinas foreign exchange reserves now exceed two trillion dollars. Conversely, the US is the largest indebted nation in the world. Besides China, other countries whose economies have done well in the recent past include Brazil, India, South Korea, Russia and South Africa. Further, in any survey of the global economic scene, one cannot ignore Japan and Germany whose economies currently remain the second and the fourth largest in the world respectively in dollar terms. Thus, economically speaking, the world is already multi-polar with the US economy enjoying the leading position. In the military field also, the balance will change slowly to the disadvantage of the US as other major economic powers, especially China, increase their military expenditures to reflect their growing economic strength and protect their expanding global economic interests. As the relative strength, economic and military, of the United States changes, howsoever slowly, to its advantage and the power of its competitors increases, the international order will inevitably undergo a fundamental change diminishing gradually the US ability to impose its will on the rest of the international community and to influence international events. This process will commence with structural changes in international security, economic and commercial institutions to reflect the changed global military and economic realities. Keeping in view the Chinese demand for a new international reserve currency, one would conclude that this process has already begun. The same conclusion can be drawn from the demand for the reform of the UN Security Council. The process may also lead to the establishment of new international institutions in response to the natural desire of emerging great powers to play a more influential role internationally to safeguard and promote their national interests. The possibility of the outbreak of international armed conflicts cannot be ruled out particularly if the powers which control the existing world order fail to accommodate the justified demands of emerging powers. If one looks ahead over the next 50 to 100 years, one comes to the inevitable conclusion that the relative strength and influence of the US and other Western powers will gradually decline making way for new great powers, especially China and India, to play their own due role on the international arena. The US, following its victory in the Cold War, loomed like a colossus over the globe with hardly any country able to challenge its supremacy. The US foreign policy experts, in the euphoria of this victory, declared the dawn of a unipolar world. Ideologically, it was claimed, that the moment marked the end of history. Henceforth, the main goal of the US grand strategy would be to prevent the emergence of any power in any part of the world able to challenge its supremacy. However, these declarations did not stop the march of events or the flow of history. Within two decades, the global scene has undergone a radical transformation. The US domination of the global economy is fast eroding. Due to its massive deficits in balance of trade, the position of dollar as a reserve currency is being challenged. The current financial and economic crisis has exposed the inadequacies of the Anglo-Saxon liberal economic system. Even militarily, the US is has currently over-extended because of its costly involvements, both in human and material terms, in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In short, for the US the unipolar moment has already passed. So has passed the US ability to order the world around to suit its convenience. Unfortunately for the US and the world, there is a mismatch between the US foreign policy goals and its power to achieve them. This mismatch is likely to cause a lot of avoidable international crises until the US policy makers overcome their naivet and lower their sights to bring their foreign policy goals within the reach of the power at the disposal of their country. The US attack on Iraq in 2003 was the result of this naivet. This optional war has cost the US dearly in men and materials besides tarnishing badly the US image within the international community. Even if the attack on Afghanistan is justified by the US policy makers because of 9/11, it is questionable whether the goal of the transformation of the tribal and conservative Afghan society that the US has set for itself is within the reach of its power. In Afghanistan, the US has also been guilty of over-emphasis on the use of military rather than political means for achieving its objectives. The US policy towards Iran and its nuclear programme under the Bush Administration was another example of the mismatch between the US power and its foreign policy objectives. The US attempt to force Iran to terminate its uranium enrichment programme through UN Security Council sanctions and threats of the use of force failed miserably. The Iranian government knew too well that the US was in no position to carry out its threats because it was already bogged down in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. As for the UN Security Council sanctions, they were greatly diluted by Russia and China which had substantial strategic interests engaged in Iran. Iran has now made a new proposal for reopening negotiations with P-5 plus one while skirting the issue of its uranium enrichment programme entirely. This proposal was followed a day later by the Russian foreign ministers rejection of the idea of new sanctions against Iran leaving the Obama Administration with no option but to accept Irans new offer of talks which fell far short of its demands. It is a strategic imperative for the US to bring its foreign policy objectives within the reach of its power by lowering its sights, by emphasising the use of political means over the use of military for their realisation and by carrying the international community with it rather than working in defiance of its will. There are some signs that the Obama Administration may be in the process of absorbing these important lessons. Until, however, it does so, the US and the international community will continue to stumble from crisis to crisis. The writer is a retired ambassador. E-mail: javid.husain@gmail.com