The year 2026 opened with a series of maneuvers by the United States that continue to unsettle the global landscape. Beneath the surface of international diplomacy, powerful undercurrents are surging. Even as the aftershocks of the military strike on Venezuela linger, Donald Trump has turned his sights toward Greenland, alternating between economic buyouts and martial threats.
» The Americans are withdrawing to the Western Hemisphere.
They are transitioning into a "normal" regional power. «
This predatory posture—where even allies are not spared—raises a fundamental question: Is this the brute assertion of a military hegemon, or the final, desperate thrashings of a superpower in decline? As the rift between the US and Europe widens over the Greenland dispute, and the very foundations of the NATO alliance tremble, what kind of shockwaves will the global order sustain?1940s political cartoon by Theodor Seuss Geisel (Dr. Seuss) satirizing "America First" isolationism. An elderly woman in an "America First" sweater reads "Adolf the Wolf" to two horrified children, remarking: "...and the Wolf chewed up the children and spit out their bones... but those were foreign children, and it didn't really matter."
Huang Jing:
Regarding the abduction of Venezuelan President Maduro and the First Lady—an act of
blatant violent aggression—how do you foresee its impact?
Sergey Karaganov: To be clear, we are still operating without full transparency regarding the facts; the abduction is peculiar, appearing almost like a choreographed performance. While clearly the work of US security apparatuses, their local facilitators remain in the shadows. However, the trend is undeniable: Trump and the US are attempting to pivot back to the Western Hemisphere as they retreat from global leadership. This process began 15 to 17 years ago, though it went largely unremarked by the masses.
Huang: We only truly grasped it about 15 years ago.
Karaganov: Exactly. Circa 2006 or 2007. It was an internal discussion then, but the trajectory was visible. Notably, when Obama took office, his instinct was an "America First" strategy, but he was constrained by the globalist factions surrounding him. The kidnapping of Maduro and the "piracy" of seizing oil tankers are criminal acts. Yet, there is a "silver lining": the Americans are withdrawing to the Western Hemisphere. They are transitioning into a "normal" regional power rather than a global hegemon, shedding the pretense of world leadership. It is a double-edged sword. While we must condemn the incredible crime of abducting an elected leader, we are seeing a strategic retreat. For years, I have argued that we must create the conditions to help the US exit its global role—without triggering a world war.
Sergey Karaganov: To be clear, we are still operating without full transparency regarding the facts; the abduction is peculiar, appearing almost like a choreographed performance. While clearly the work of US security apparatuses, their local facilitators remain in the shadows. However, the trend is undeniable: Trump and the US are attempting to pivot back to the Western Hemisphere as they retreat from global leadership. This process began 15 to 17 years ago, though it went largely unremarked by the masses.
Huang: We only truly grasped it about 15 years ago.
Karaganov: Exactly. Circa 2006 or 2007. It was an internal discussion then, but the trajectory was visible. Notably, when Obama took office, his instinct was an "America First" strategy, but he was constrained by the globalist factions surrounding him. The kidnapping of Maduro and the "piracy" of seizing oil tankers are criminal acts. Yet, there is a "silver lining": the Americans are withdrawing to the Western Hemisphere. They are transitioning into a "normal" regional power rather than a global hegemon, shedding the pretense of world leadership. It is a double-edged sword. While we must condemn the incredible crime of abducting an elected leader, we are seeing a strategic retreat. For years, I have argued that we must create the conditions to help the US exit its global role—without triggering a world war.
Aggression as a Symptom of Decay: POTUS claiming US used classified "Disruptor" weapon to
paralyze Venezuelan defense systems in order to hijack Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
Huang: Agreed. I recall your work on "Disorder," suggesting that a
chaotic US decline is a threat to us all. This hegemonic fatigue began
because the US simply could not sustain the post-1991 international
system. You cite 2006; I would argue the definitive cracks appeared by
2008.
Karaganov: The decline of Western hegemony actually dates back to the 1960s. The signs were there, but ignored. When the USSR achieved nuclear parity, the foundation of a 500-year-old Western dominance began to crumble. After the Soviet collapse, the West—and the US specifically—fell into a state of "euphoria," believing they had reversed the tide of history. This lasted barely 15 years before Russia began to reconstitute its position and China emerged as a titan. Blinded by their "victory," the American elite made massive strategic blunders. They essentially subsidized China's rise, naively believing that capitalism would inevitably lead to a "democracy" that would act as a US satellite. When reality failed to meet their visions, they doubled down on failed invasions—Afghanistan, Iraq. By 2008, the internal decision to begin a long-term withdrawal had already taken root.
Karaganov: The decline of Western hegemony actually dates back to the 1960s. The signs were there, but ignored. When the USSR achieved nuclear parity, the foundation of a 500-year-old Western dominance began to crumble. After the Soviet collapse, the West—and the US specifically—fell into a state of "euphoria," believing they had reversed the tide of history. This lasted barely 15 years before Russia began to reconstitute its position and China emerged as a titan. Blinded by their "victory," the American elite made massive strategic blunders. They essentially subsidized China's rise, naively believing that capitalism would inevitably lead to a "democracy" that would act as a US satellite. When reality failed to meet their visions, they doubled down on failed invasions—Afghanistan, Iraq. By 2008, the internal decision to begin a long-term withdrawal had already taken root.
» Russia and China should work together to facilitate an orderly decline for the United States.
This is in everyone's interest, including Washington's. «
August 2021, managing 'disordered' collapse: US troops at Kabul Airport
use rifles to deter Afghan civilians attempting to flee during the withdrawal.
Huang: I agree, though I’d add a nuance: China’s rise wasn't merely a gift from the US. It was the result of correct internal policies and a desire to integrate into the global system to reform it from within. The US "vision" of a peaceful evolution into a Western-style state was indeed a profound miscalculation.
Karaganov: I don't disagree, but consider this: China’s development was facilitated by the Soviet/Russian security umbrella. Even when China was militarily weaker, the US never dared a direct strike. Furthermore, the US committed the ultimate strategic error. Through their actions, they pushed Russia and China—natural neighbors—into an unbreakable de facto alliance. Over the last 15 years, this "quasi-alliance" has effectively doubled the strategic weight of both nations. It is an monumental failure by Western competitors.
Huang: From a historical perspective, we remember how the USSR helped build China’s industrial base. Yet the USSR also suffered from overexpansion—Afghanistan being the fatal error—which led to the fragile US-China cooperation of the 1980s to contain Moscow.
Karaganov: Indeed. But it wasn't just overexpansion; it was arrogance. Khrushchev’s arrogance toward Mao in the 50s and the refusal to aid China’s nuclear program were grave miscalculations.
Huang: Yet China succeeded regardless.
Karaganov: Yes, and that autonomous development secured China’s strategic autonomy for decades. Had we helped then, the rapprochement with Nixon might never have been necessary. History would be unrecognizable. But today, the US is committing the greatest error of the modern era. Post-1991, they mistook their moment for permanent "Globalist" dominion. They tried to export "universal values" through Color Revolutions and the Arab Spring—all of which failed. Now, they are retreating into the Western Hemisphere because they must, not because they want to.
Karaganov: I don't disagree, but consider this: China’s development was facilitated by the Soviet/Russian security umbrella. Even when China was militarily weaker, the US never dared a direct strike. Furthermore, the US committed the ultimate strategic error. Through their actions, they pushed Russia and China—natural neighbors—into an unbreakable de facto alliance. Over the last 15 years, this "quasi-alliance" has effectively doubled the strategic weight of both nations. It is an monumental failure by Western competitors.
Huang: From a historical perspective, we remember how the USSR helped build China’s industrial base. Yet the USSR also suffered from overexpansion—Afghanistan being the fatal error—which led to the fragile US-China cooperation of the 1980s to contain Moscow.
Karaganov: Indeed. But it wasn't just overexpansion; it was arrogance. Khrushchev’s arrogance toward Mao in the 50s and the refusal to aid China’s nuclear program were grave miscalculations.
Huang: Yet China succeeded regardless.
Karaganov: Yes, and that autonomous development secured China’s strategic autonomy for decades. Had we helped then, the rapprochement with Nixon might never have been necessary. History would be unrecognizable. But today, the US is committing the greatest error of the modern era. Post-1991, they mistook their moment for permanent "Globalist" dominion. They tried to export "universal values" through Color Revolutions and the Arab Spring—all of which failed. Now, they are retreating into the Western Hemisphere because they must, not because they want to.
Huang: As you famously said: US decline isn't the problem; the "disorder" of that decline is the catastrophe. Does the invasion of Venezuela reflect a managed exit or a chaotic one?
Karaganov: Let’s put it this way: Russia and China should work together to facilitate an orderly decline for the United States. This is in everyone's interest, including Washington's. The US was an "accidental" global hegemon. Before WWII, they were an economic powerhouse but a geopolitical non-factor. They became the world leader with very little capital investment because Europe collapsed and the USSR was exhausted.
Now, as the "Global South" and China rise, the West realizes it can no longer control the very system of free trade and international law it created. So, they have begun to sabotage their own system—using sanctions and breaking trade rules—because they can no longer win by the old rules. In Ukraine, the Biden administration initially thought they could isolate Russia from Europe. They succeeded in creating a rift, but now that they see Russia is willing to escalate—even to the nuclear level—they are looking for the exit. Trump is vocal about withdrawal, but Biden started the process. I saw it myself: Biden's 2022 New York Times piece, where he set "red lines" for the US (no direct entry, no regime change), was the first signal of the American retreat.
Karaganov: Let’s put it this way: Russia and China should work together to facilitate an orderly decline for the United States. This is in everyone's interest, including Washington's. The US was an "accidental" global hegemon. Before WWII, they were an economic powerhouse but a geopolitical non-factor. They became the world leader with very little capital investment because Europe collapsed and the USSR was exhausted.
Now, as the "Global South" and China rise, the West realizes it can no longer control the very system of free trade and international law it created. So, they have begun to sabotage their own system—using sanctions and breaking trade rules—because they can no longer win by the old rules. In Ukraine, the Biden administration initially thought they could isolate Russia from Europe. They succeeded in creating a rift, but now that they see Russia is willing to escalate—even to the nuclear level—they are looking for the exit. Trump is vocal about withdrawal, but Biden started the process. I saw it myself: Biden's 2022 New York Times piece, where he set "red lines" for the US (no direct entry, no regime change), was the first signal of the American retreat.
Zelensky, Starmer, Macron, and Merz coordinating their seizure of Russian assets, December 8, 2025.
Huang: You warned the Americans in 2012: "You are pushing us into a corner, and you will end up in one yourselves." In 2020, you argued that the goal wasn't just defeating Ukraine, but dismantling the Western international system itself—a system used as a tool for hypocritical hegemony. Do you still stand by that?
Karaganov: Absolutely. And we are succeeding. By raising the stakes, we have essentially pushed the US out of the war. We made them realize that Russia would risk nuclear conflict over Europe. Biden never explicitly promised to fight for Europe if it were attacked; he only spoke of "support." Now, Russia’s objective is to break the will of the European elites. Europe has historically been the source of the world's greatest troubles—colonialism, racism, world wars. They are currently drifting toward a Third World War. Our strategic long-term goal should be to push Europe to the periphery of the global stage, creating systemic conditions where their current "sinister" elites are rendered obsolete.
Huang: On that point, you and Trump seem to be in total agreement.
Karaganov: (Laughs) I said it first.
Karaganov: Absolutely. And we are succeeding. By raising the stakes, we have essentially pushed the US out of the war. We made them realize that Russia would risk nuclear conflict over Europe. Biden never explicitly promised to fight for Europe if it were attacked; he only spoke of "support." Now, Russia’s objective is to break the will of the European elites. Europe has historically been the source of the world's greatest troubles—colonialism, racism, world wars. They are currently drifting toward a Third World War. Our strategic long-term goal should be to push Europe to the periphery of the global stage, creating systemic conditions where their current "sinister" elites are rendered obsolete.
Huang: On that point, you and Trump seem to be in total agreement.
Karaganov: (Laughs) I said it first.
[中俄应该携手合作，帮助美国实现“有序衰落.”]
Huang Jing is a Distinguished Professor at Shanghai International Studies University and a globally recognized authority on Chinese politics and US-Asia relations. Formerly a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution and Director at the National University of Singapore, he specializes in the US-China-Russia strategic triangle. He is a prolific author and advisor known for his realist analysis of great power competition and global governance.
Sergey Karaganov is the Honorary Chairman of the Russian Council on Foreign and Defense Policy and a presidential advisor to both Boris Yeltsin and Vladimir Putin. He currently serves as the Academic Supervisor of the Faculty of World Economy and International Affairs at Moscow’s Higher School of Economics. A primary architect of the "Greater Eurasia" concept, he is a leading realist thinker on Russian grand strategy and the transformation of the global order.