Depends, Terry.
If some countries want to take the risk then they can get going with HSR. Up to them.
IMO, it's a lot like watching Georgia and South Carolina starting to build new nuclear reactors when it was obvious to many of us that wind and solar prices were coming down so fast that expensive new nuclear was a major economic mistake. And it's proven out to be so.
YMMV.
So---
America leads us into the 21st Century, but only after others have tested the waters.
It is possibly prudent to let the others forge ahead, but shows timidity in anyone claiming a leadership role.
China, apparently is willing to risk something in order to gain huge rewards. I'd argue that their risk is already paying huge dividends & that Canada and the US are already paying through the nose for their lack of courage. When a have-not country ponders whose influence they want to be under I suspect that they will be influenced by the progress they see in China rather than the provincial proclivities that the America's evidence.
The Eu has been into HSR for decades, linkage with the New Silk Road just makes sense. If HL does work as advertised it will augment the millions of miles of HSR already in place. The American dream of linking countries through maritime dominance faces the need to rebuild every salt water port due to sea level rise & huge freight planes do so much damage to the atmosphere that their days are surely numbered. When faced with the need to rebuild a gigantic freight port every time the ocean rises above a certain point, or to enhance your rail system to handle modern HSR, won't most opt for the second alternative?
With Asia, Europe, England, Africa and India linked by rapid, clean transport. What need is there to spend trillions upgrading ports that will only serve as links to Australia and the Americas? Already the Eu is contemplating laws that restrict dirty ships from their waters. Running a freighter on relatively clean #1 Diesel adds hugely to the costs of maritime trade, and even now they suffer when compared to HSR.
Britain ran an Empire from a small island, America attempts the same from an isolated continent. China will run her version from the worlds largest landmass, with little need of maritime might or trade. Unconnected islands and continents will simply become backwater regions. Trading between themselves with the now outmoded, dirty, expensive and slow ships that once brought glory to the British Empire.
At one time barge traffic was dominant, and towns along the canals grew. Steam Rail ended that. Then Diesel Rail and roadways came into their glory, fed by maritime trade. Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York & London, Paris, in Asia every safe harbor blossomed & all was well with the world.
Then High Speed Rail raised it's streamlined head. First linking the old port cities, then expanding inland and connection former backwaters until they bloomed. The old port cities now show signs of aging, overcrowding and are pricing themselves out of most markets. The brightest opted for Silicon Valleys regardless of their local, businesses prefer stable, low tax environments with great schools, great healthcare and a decent climate. Transportation isn't high on their list because HSR connects everywhere to everywhere - as long as you're connected. Huge cities are sprouting along the main lines just as cities had once gravitated to sites along the canal, or along the tracks, or beside the freeway.
This wont stop unless climate change or an atomic apocalypse closes everything down.
If the Hyperloop does prove itself, who will be the first to exploit it's advantages? Certainly not cultures that haven't yet entered the HSR age.
Terry