Sure it does. Every dictator knows that if he builds up a little navy to extract advantage over his neighbors by claiming sea lanes, there's a good chance he'll get smacked down by the world's largest navy. Navies are expensive to build, and this threat keeps most (exception: China) from even trying. That creates certainty for shippers, their customers, their insurance companies, and the economies in which they operate.
no one can really expect the US to keep any sort of agreements
To the extent you're correct, national leaders will feel the need to build up their own navies. If the US isn't going to protect their sea lanes, they will be forced to take on that responsibility themselves.
most countries aren't interested in warring
Most. What about the others? All it takes is one bully in your neighborhood to cause serious problems. Will the enlightened nations of the world come to your rescue? Maybe. Maybe not. It may cost you.
The organizations set up at Bretton Woods would be in place even if the US fails completely.
Bretton Woods is an agreement, and an agreement is only as good as its enforcement. Free global trade can only happen as long as someone enforces it, by keeping those sea lanes open. When the US withdraws, how long before a country decides it can exploit that insecurity to its advantage?
I do not share your optimism.
If the US cedes the sea, every other oceangoing nation will be forced to build up its navy to preserve its trade security. More armed ships at sea under more flags will lead to more flashpoints, more clashes, and more opportunities for small conflicts to spin out of control.
Withdrawing from the sea may turn out to be the smart move for the US, but I believe it will portend bad things for the rest of the world.
Sure it does. Every dictator knows that if he builds up a little navy to extract advantage over his neighbors by claiming sea lanes, there's a good chance he'll get smacked down by the world's largest navy. Navies are expensive to build, and this threat keeps most (exception: China) from even trying. That creates certainty for shippers, their customers, their insurance companies, and the economies in which they operate.
no one can really expect the US to keep any sort of agreements
To the extent you're correct, national leaders will feel the need to build up their own navies. If the US isn't going to protect their sea lanes, they will be forced to take on that responsibility themselves.
most countries aren't interested in warring
Most. What about the others? All it takes is one bully in your neighborhood to cause serious problems. Will the enlightened nations of the world come to your rescue? Maybe. Maybe not. It may cost you.
The organizations set up at Bretton Woods would be in place even if the US fails completely.
Bretton Woods is an agreement, and an agreement is only as good as its enforcement. Free global trade can only happen as long as someone enforces it, by keeping those sea lanes open. When the US withdraws, how long before a country decides it can exploit that insecurity to its advantage?
I do not share your optimism.
If the US cedes the sea, every other oceangoing nation will be forced to build up its navy to preserve its trade security. More armed ships at sea under more flags will lead to more flashpoints, more clashes, and more opportunities for small conflicts to spin out of control.
Withdrawing from the sea may turn out to be the smart move for the US, but I believe it will portend bad things for the rest of the world.