It depends on how you define "the end of hegemony". The first important imperialist war lost against the "BRICS" could very well be treated historically as a good chronological starting point of the change in global hegemony (which is a progressive process with a gray barrier)
I think it would be wrong for any historian to not at least acknowledge that idk some 80% of Russian military technology and current capabilities were inhereted from the USSR. Indeed the war was fought primarily with cold war era weapons from old NATO stocks and former USSR countries all sent to Ukraine. Its basically the cold war went hot scenario but 30 years later.
Even at the worst times the USSR was a far bigger geopolitical opponent than BRICS is or will likely ever be imo exactly because China doesn't want to fight the US military or otherwise and as such their strategy is to be friends with everyone at the same time.
The end result is even if the US ends up having to readjust their behavior they're still the only major power willing to force others to do their bidding.
Not even? I mean if Ukraine loses then ukraine loses, ukraine losing for them means de facto accepting SOME type of security arrangement with Russia that doesn't involve expanding NATO closer and closer to their borders, or at least not through Ukraine.
The west still has overwhelming economic power and influence. "End of western hegemony"? Over what? Over Ukraine? Well not over what's left of it.
Over the balkans? Maybe.
Over the world? Definitely not the end, in fact I expect some adventurism as overcompensation.
NATO losing to Russia in Ukraine, and to the Houthis in the Gulf of Aden, will send a message to a lot of neutral countries that (1) NATO can't / won't protect you anymore, and (2) you can push back against NATO and win or at least gain concessions. NATO will still be the single largest military bloc in the world, but they'll actually have to negotiate, maybe even compromise.
Yeah...only thing that makes me feel like this is still semi-hyperbolic is...didn't Afghanistan and the last quarter of a century plus already kinda show that to be the case? Ukraine itself already kinda seems like the result of that sense that the west is insurmountably powerful being squashed.
If he loses Zelensky pushes the big red "end America" button he's been holding for Michael Flynn ever since Flynn got word the FBI was gonna raid his house.
I mean… why specifically this war exactly? Is it because it’s a near peer war which means that Russia shows it can defeat western weapons? Because almost the entire eastern bloc is in NATO, and Azerbaijan is crushing Armenia which is also a near peer war.