The title of today's column is not only valid for our country but also for the whole world. Indeed, "Neoliberalism," which found its form after the "Cold War" and is mostly known as the "Washington Consensus," has expired. Commentators are now expressing their views that the world has entered the "Post-Neoliberalism" era. Neoliberalism, which is imposed on developing or underdeveloped countries as if it were the only salvation recipe, is even referred to as "deviation" in the United States.

Politically, Neoliberalism included priorities such as liberalizing trade as much as possible, reducing public spending, privatizing state economic enterprises, deregulating the market, and removing legal barriers to the free movement of capital. Neoliberalism, the determining ideology of the international economic system controlled by the United States, has been treated as a sacred text in the last 30 years. According to mainstream economists who champion this ideology, there was no possibility of an alternative economy.

With the support of the United States, "China" was also included in this global system. Americans believed that the global system would transform China on a liberal-political basis. As a result of China attracting a significant portion of American production, industries in the central regions of the United States collapsed. In the last 20 years, the Chinese economy has grown steadily and reached dimensions that can compete with the United States.

Ultimately, Americans see China's rise as an "existential threat." In summary, while the Neoliberal economic system weakened the United States, it not only strengthened China economically but also militarily. The consequences of Neoliberal policies gave rise to "Trumpism" among the Republican Party base and fostered more left-leaning tendencies within the Democratic Party base.

Joe Biden continues the trade wars with China initiated by Donald Trump. In fact, Biden has intensified this war even further. By signing decisions that increase customs tariffs to protect and strengthen domestic production, Biden Administration has raised concerns even among Western allies. Trump had withdrawn the United States from the multilateral "Trans-Pacific Partnership." Although Biden stated "America is back" after being elected as President, the United States did not return to the "Trans-Pacific Partnership." All these developments are considered the most evident signs of the United States' departure from the "Washington Consensus."

Jake Sullivan, the National Security Advisor of the United States, hammered the final nail in the coffin of the "Washington Consensus" in a speech he delivered at the Brookings Institution in April. Declaring the death of the "Washington Consensus," Sullivan argued that the new consensus would not leave America's allies behind and stated, "This strategy will build a fairer, more resilient global economic order for ourselves and people everywhere." Sullivan was attempting to reassure skeptical Western allies about the so-called "new consensus."

According to Sullivan, the "Old Consensus" was a series of tragic mistakes that weakened the United States and made it a more divided country internally. It was indeed strange for the United States, which accused China of challenging the international liberal system, to declare the death of this system in Sullivan's own words.

Sullivan's speech made a significant impact. Edward Luce's article in the Financial Times titled "The new consensus in Washington: Yesterday's US economic orthodoxy is today's heresy" summarized the situation. In his article, Luce stated, "Joe Biden's language is much gentler, but his implementation is stricter. Biden's policy is Trumpism with a humane face."

Debates continue in the United States. However, the statements from senior figures in the Biden administration reveal the ideological fragmentation at the center of the global system. The United States wants to set the rules of the new global system itself. On the other hand, behind the backdrop of the "new Cold War" with China, there is an intention to divide the world, which has become multipolar and multilateral, into two poles between the United States and China, just like in the old Cold War, and create a bipolar power balance.

So what will we do? Where will our country stand at this crossroads? What role does Ankara envision for itself on the world stage? Furthermore, how will Türkiye demonstrate its "distinctiveness" and present itself to the world? We will continue in another article, but it is essential to emphasize that our country primarily needs "internal harmony" at this point. An effective strategy cannot be pursued without achieving internal harmony. As our country enters a new era, it is necessary to contemplate these issues and put forth theses.