The competition between liberalism and absolutism has reemerged, with the nations of the world increasingly lining up, as in the past, along ideological lines. ~Robert Kagan

Part of that “lining up” along ideological lines would include our support for the dictators of Ethiopia and Egypt, the kings of Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Qatar, the emirs of the UAE and Kuwait, and the military strongman in Pakistan, while states such as Iran ally themselves with the very demagogic but also quite democratic Venezuela, Bolivia and Nicaragua.  In many cases, you, the head of government, make use of the allies that are available to you.  You exploit regional divisions to your advantage, and you make the most out of ideological differences between your foe and your would-be ally while minimising them between yourself and your would-be ally. 

Thus we pretend that Yemen, for example, is not for all intents and purposes a one-party military government (which goes through the niceties of a parliament and elections, etc.), or rather we ignore that it is this, because Yemen may be a useful place for interdicting Red Sea traffic we want stopped or for countering jihadi recruiting in the hinterland.  Yemen was once a staunch ally of Saddam Hussein and Iraq, based on strategic ties to Baghdad going back decades to counterbalance the Saudis and, since 1962, because of an ideological affinity for anti-monarchist, anti-Islamist Arab nationalist republicanism.  Ideological alignment matched national interest in those days, until certain harsh economic realities imposed by the Saudi expulsion of their workers made them appreciate the finer points of cooperation.  Now the military ruler of Sana’a is on our side–for now. 

Imagining that our allies are somehow our ideological kindred spirits is very misleading, since it makes us assume that they will agree with courses of action with which they may want nothing to do.  This sort of confused thinking was probably part of the reason why there was so much whining about French non-participation in the invasion of Iraq.  It was inconceivable that they, democratic republic that they were, would not want to fight on our side!  Except that French national interests–and common sense–dictated otherwise.  

Kagan started out by making sense, stressing the conflicts and competition between nations, which should have led him to understand that these ideological lines will, must, be crossed when national interest requires it.