Hilary’s emails, the Republican struggle over the House speakership, and the latest celebrity dustup occupy our news media. Meanwhile, the rest of the world trudges on. Even though few of us tune into what’s happening elsewhere, things do happen elsewhere.

The news magazine, The Economist (British based, not American) recently featured the new “great game” being played out from the South China Sea to Syria.

Since World War II, the United States has enforced what is called the liberal world order. That is, an order which favors openness and rule-based relations.

Despite tragic blunders at times, the world is a better place than it would have been if, say, Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia had triumphed instead of the alliance led by the United States.

Yet, too many wrong choices have led to consequences we can’t escape. Our military prowess could not handle the cultural conflicts in the Middle East. Atrocities happened on our watch, like those in the prisons we operated in Iraq. Our reputation as the good guys plummeted.

Russia has profited by our mistakes and is attempting to place its footprint in the Middle East, to prove that they are more capable than we are in solving Middle East problems.

In Asia, we can claim some credit for democracy’s growth in places like Japan and Korea.

Nevertheless, China has become an economic power to rival the United States, despite its autocratic rule. The Chinese want international power as befits, they feel, a powerful country. They do not want an international system run only by Americans. Our task is to convince them that it is in China’s interest to join a system based on rules and order.

Are we up to it? The Economist noted that the greatest brake on American leadership is “dysfunctional politics in Washington.”