I think it would be a mistake to presume that U.S. interests are so well defined by national boundaries. The business interests of U.S. chartered entities are all very well intertwined with those of other players. I would liken these kinds of operations to the 'direct action' of anti-establishment protesters. To force a dialectic outside the usual bounds of explicit process. These technocrats have a vision for what security should look like, and will steer their considerable resources to that end. You knowbreaking eggs and all that.
That is entirely possible but if that is the case maybe it has not been a good move (not that technocrats know a shite of what they do).
The actual situation is like if Babylon (with the highest and more powerful walls) would have sent a letter to all the countries around.
"Look everyone, we have a catapult that can destroy every clay wall (that by the way we are the biggest sellers in the world) in 5 minutes"
Everyone (even their enemies) would first stop using clay for their walls, and second they would start using stone making things harder for Babylon catapult
Strange situation.
it would be a good move if Babylon plans on selling hollow stones via sockpuppets.
nobody would see the difference.