China, Russia Must Manage 'Orderly' US Decline | Huang J. and S. Karaganov

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. « 

1941 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."

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?

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.

 

» US decline isn't the problem; the "disorder" of that decline is the catastrophe. «

Aggression as a symptom of decay: POTUS claiming US used classified "Disruptor" 

weapon to paralyze Venezuelan defense systems in order to hijack 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.

 

» 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.

 

» The US will never come to the rescue of Europe. « 

 

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.

 

 » The source of all ills and evil in the history of humanity. «
 Zelensky, Starmer, Macron, and Merz, 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.

 

[Continue from 27:00 in the video above—highly insightful and well worth the watch.] 

 

Quoted from:
Huang Jing and Sergey Karaganov (January 27, 2026) - Russia and China’s Role in Overseeing an ‘Orderly’ US Decline.

[中俄应该携手合作，帮助美国实现“有序衰落.”]

 

"How can you discuss anything with Kaja Kallas? Neither we will ever discuss anything with her, 

nor will the Americans, and this is obvious. We can only wait until she leaves," Peskov said.

See also:
Pierre-Antoine Plaquevent (January 26, 2026) - The Return of Great Spaces: The end of the globalist world order. 

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.

The Return of Great Spaces | Pierre-Antoine Plaquevent

One century ago, the continentalist school of geopolitics proposed a world-system organized into pan-regions (Haushofer): an international order divided into large, autonomous continental spaces (Carl Schmitt), each polarized around a core power. This third way—between the nation-state nationalism rendered obsolete after the First World War and the globalism of the League of Nations—is once again presenting itself today as an updated alternative to a declining globalism.

One's utopia is the other's dystopia: A world divided among five superstates.
Austro-Japanese aristocrat Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi's 1923 world map.

 

Regional imperialisms that restrain one another, rather than a hypocritical, monopolar planetary imperialism. Logically, if the United States were truly to accept a division of the world into autonomous great spaces, it would have to leave eastern Ukraine to Russia and Taiwan to China, in exchange for the abandonment of Sino-Russian influence in Latin America. Above all, it would have to restrain Israel in its posture towards Iran.

China, Russia, and Iran are the strategic powers that dominate the Eurasian heartland. A stabilized world order is possible only if the United States recognizes the respective spheres of influence of the Eurasian powers. This is the logical corollary of the updated Monroe Doctrine to which the Trump administration refers. Yet the history of the previous century shows that a thalassocracy of inherently globalist character does not accept a US retreat to the Western Hemisphere alone. The near future will tell us whether what is currently unfolding in Latin America marks a genuine US acceptance of a new post-globalist division of the world or the prologue to a broader conflagration.

» "Great North"—Russia, the United States, and Europe, forming a common sociocultural space. «
Vladislav Surkov, 2023.

 

The realistic scenario would thus be a division of the world into longitudinal corridors of influence among the powers of the “Global North” (Surkov), coupled with the construction of a multipolar world order of great powers that would definitively replace the faltering project of global governance. The pessimistic scenario, by contrast, would be that the move against Venezuela foreshadows an attack on Iran, after having seized control of the principal ally of political Eurasia in the southern part of the Western Hemisphere.

Quoted from:
Pierre-Antoine Plaquevent (January 26, 2026) - The Return of Great Spaces: The end of the globalist world order.

 

 

See also:

Vladislav Surkov (2023) - Рождение Великого Севера. (The Birth of the Great North.)

Alain de Benoist (2023) - The Time of the Civilisational States.  

Pierre-Antoine Plaquevent (born 1976) is a French geopolitical analyst, specializing on the intersection of infowarfare and the evolution of political philosophy. He is the founder of Strategika, a think tank and editorial platform that provides prospective analysis on international security and metapolitics.

Strategic and Esoteric Battles for Greenland and the Arctic | Daniel Estulin

The Greenland issue consists of both a public political element and a hidden esoteric element. I am going to explain both. The Arctic dispute is an "all-or-nothing" fight for the distribution of the North. Russia consistently maintains the position that the Gakkel Ridge is a continuation of the Eurasian continental massif. Meanwhile, the Kingdom of Denmark, by way of Greenland, proposes an alternative interpretation, linking the territory to the Mid-Atlantic Ridge.

 

» Shifting the balance of power through alliances and the control of key territories. « 

United States Pituffik Space Base, formerly Thule Air Base, on the

northwest coast of Greenland in the Kingdom of Denmark.

 

Behind this controversy, a third actor is becoming increasingly visible: the United States. They prefer to act indirectly, shifting the balance of power through alliances and the control of key territories. In their vision of global economic regionalization, this territory would encompass Greenland, Canada, the United States, and Mexico, reaching all the way down to Venezuela and Colombia. Greenland is fundamental to this configuration. Trump’s "chatter" about purchasing the island is not the eccentricity many claim it to be; rather, it is the covert activation of a process of strategic redistribution. Controlling Greenland would grant Washington more than just a military advantage by placing them closer to Russia; it would provide direct access to the core of very important Arctic resources. We are talking about colossal volumes of mineral resources. This factor, more than any other, explains the growing American interest—an interest that curiously only became public under Trump.

 

» We are talking about colossal volumes of mineral resources. «

The mythical Arctic continent of Hyperborea on Gerardus Mercator’s 1595 map, split 

into the islands of Thule and Ultima Thule, often identified with Iceland and Greenland.

 

If the US establishes de facto control over Greenland, Washington will inevitably begin pushing the theory that the Gakkel Ridge is an extension of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge stretching from Greenland toward Siberia. This interpretation is dangerous because it provides the legal and political justification for US claims over the Central Arctic, where almost all the natural resources are located. This maneuver would put the US on a war footing with Russia, from whom it had wrested influence in Venezuela. In mere hours, the influence that Russia had painstakingly built over 25 years was dismantled. Now, the US is going to take northern territory. The logic is evident: Greenland allows the United States to close the Arctic arc from the North Atlantic and gain levers of influence, especially over the Northern Sea Route—Russia’s primary maritime route—which will become the main stage for resource competition over the next decade.

» This is not symbolical nor ceremonial, this is real power. «

The Prince and Grand Master of the Sovereign Military Hospitaller Order of St John of Jerusalem of 
Rhodes and of Malta, Fra’ John Dunlap, awarded King Charles III Coronation Medal, March 26, 2025.

 

That is the political side. On the other hand, there is the esoteric part. While political scientists and analysts focus on policy, geopolitics, and geoeconomics, I am going to tell you about the power in the shadows. One of the heraldic symbols of the British secret societies is the Royal Badge of Wales. Between 1953 and 2008, it featured the Red Dragon with the motto "Y ddraig goch ddyry cychwyn" ("The Red Dragon inspires action"). Though it was officially updated in 2008 to include a crown, four cheetahs, and the motto "Pleidiol Wyf i'm Gwlad" ("I am true to my country"), the claim is that the change is a cover story. The true symbol was and remains the Red Dragon—a symbol rooted in Arthurian legend and adopted by the Tudors—representing an image of unimaginable force. 

 

» Hidden knowledge and the number 7, the force of the underworld. «

Solidly in the grips of dark forces since long before the days of Dr. Dee.

 

Furthermore, there exists an occult Order of the Green Dragon. Often described in esoteric literature as a murky mystical society linked to Tibetan or Japanese traditions, it is said to influence major historical figures through the mastery of etheric bodies. In occultism, colors, numbers, dates, and images provide a 'cover language' for the invisible world that connects mysticism to power politics. Drawing from Chinese mysticism and Masonic traditions, the Green Dragon represents hidden knowledge and the number 7, the force of the underworld, while the Red Dragon represents the number 9, symbolizing the forces that triumph on the Earth's surface and the rank of guardian angels.

» Forces that triumph on the Earth's surface and the rank of guardian angels. «

Y ddraig goch, the Welsh Red Dragon. 

 

In the 16th century, these ideas were developed by John Dee, Queen Elizabeth I’s advisor and a Welsh order Kabbalist magician. Dee was the first great intelligence agent—the original James Bond—who signed his secret documents "007." The symbol of Wales on its flag—a Red Dragon on a white and green background—reflects this. Dee’s primary work involved Enochian magic, which later influenced the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn in the 19th and 20th centuries. Behind this order were the 'Sons of the Sun,' a bohemian group of British nobility that included the Prince of Wales, later to become King Edward VII, the 'Peace Maker' and master spin doctor of WWI, who 'befriended' France and Russia, and built a "ring of fire" around Germany to destroy Britain's greatest rival. And it was John Dee who created the concept of "Green Land" (Greenland), proposing that Britannia create a new empire devoid of biblical elements, uniting North America and Eurasia around the Arctic. He drew from Arthurian myths to justify claims over these lands, leading to the symbolic centering of the world at the Greenwich Meridian. In today's politics, this is the project of the New Jerusalem Kabbalists based in London. 

 

» A new empire, uniting North America and Eurasia. «

A map of the Arctic, created by the US Department of State.

 

Originally, Dee's circumpolar arctic "Green Land" empire was to be realized via the dynastic lines of Elizabeth I and Ivan the Terrible (Ivan Rurik). The Rurik dynasty, founded in 862, ruled Russia for 21 generations, and they are seen as the only ones with the historical right to sit at the metaphorical round table of world power—ranking above the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers. Genghis Khan and Ivan Rurik shared a concept of monarchy as a mystical union, while the Romanovs (of German origin) became a buffer for the Holy Roman Empire against the Golden Horde of Genghis Khan from the East.

"Европейское содружество и США." — "European Commonwealth and the US."
1952 Soviet political caricature, which aged as a fine wine.

 

Now, how does this relate to current reality? Public education and the media completely dismiss the actual power of European royals, aristocratic bloodlines, the Vatican, and secret societies. But as a matter of fact, the British Crown remains the head of state not only of the UK, but also of Canada and many other countries and territories. This is not symbolical nor ceremonial, this is real power. 'Green' eugenicist globalist King Charles III is the King of Canada, and Mark Carney is the Prime Minister he approved. And a change of power is occurring in the House of Windsor—not in favor of the old King, but in favor of his eldest son William, the son of Diana Spencer (a direct blood descendant of the Stuart monarchs and a distant Tudor), married to Kate Middleton, whose mother, Carole Elizabeth Middleton, comes from the famous Jewish billionaire Goldsmith family. To be clear: sooner than later power is moving from Elizabeth II via Charles III to William, the Prince of Wales. The struggle of the Spencers against the Windsors (the German Saxe-Coburg and Gothas, the Glücksburgs, and the Battenbergs) is a war between old and new princes, about how Britain will carry out its 'biblical alliances' during the current change of eras. 

  

Reference:

Rubén Gisbert (January 15, 2026) - The US Abandons International Law. With Daniel Estulin. (video)
[EE. UU. prescinde del derecho internacional. Con Daniel Estulin.]

 

  

» History in the making! «

Born in 1966, Daniel Estulin is a Soviet-Lithuanian-born Russian expatriate, PhD in Political and Social Economy (UAM, Spain), and self-identified former KGB agent. He has published 14 books, including "Los secretos del club Bilderberg" (2006) and "The True Story of the Bilderberg Group" (2009), with sales exceeding 7 million copies in 68 countries. In 2010, after Fidel Castro praised and quoted his work in public, the two met in Havana for high-profile meetings. On Castro's recommendation, Estulin served for years as an intelligence and military consultant to the Venezuelan Chavista elite, advising figures like Rafael Ramírez and Delcy Rodríguez. Now based in Cancún, he analyzes global affairs via estulin.media and his YouTube and Telegram channels.

After Maduro, Might Makes Right | Alexander Dugin

What does the kidnapping of the president of a sovereign country mean? Like in the era of barbarian kingdoms, Maduro was brought in and paraded through the streets of New York like a captive enemy for the amusement of the crowd. Many note that this is reminiscent of Rome in its twilight years.

 » "Reshuffling of the deck" and global conflict. The world will never be the same again. «

 

[...] And what does all this mean? [...] International law no longer exists. Appealing to the UN, asking the West to pay attention to violations of certain principles, agreements, or provisions that contradict the letter and spirit of the law — all of this is now completely futile. 

 

[...] The idea that there are certain norms and rules that can be negotiated should be left in the past once and for all. There is no international law. There is only the law of force. In a sense, it has always been this way — this is nothing new. It’s just that, at certain times, after each "reshuffling of the deck" and global conflict, when spheres of influence are redistributed, the great powers assert their right to sovereignty.  

 

» International law is always a balance of power between the victors. « 

This was the case in the First and Second World Wars. When fascist Europe became a separate entity in world politics, it demanded that the world submit to it. The world rebelled, and that power is no more. But any international law is always a balance of power between the victors. That’s the point. For more than a century, nation-states have not been sovereign actors establishing world order; world relations are shaped by ideological blocs.

[...] Trump said nothing conceptually new, but he de facto scrapped the Yalta peace, the bipolar system, the UN, and even the very idea of globalization hitherto. His position is simple: "My interests are the interests of the world hegemon. Obey me." 

 

 » In the end, these infamous and lost thieves, like wretched fruit hanging from this tree... « 

The Miseries and Misfortunes of War by Jacques Callot, 1633.

 

In fact, humanity is now in a state of fundamental humiliation. Trump simply called a spade a spade. Globalists used to soften this humiliation by pretending to listen to your opinion and allowing you to participate in the process. Now that multilateralism is over, only the right of force remains, and this is an irreversible process. The world will never be the same again.

We are in the midst of a protracted, long-running Third World War, where international law simply does not exist. It will exist sometime in the future, based on the outcome of this conflict. [...] Trump is casting an arrogant challenge: "If you are winners, then win. Like me, for example. Where is your Zelensky?" 

 

 » If you are winners, then win. Where is your Zelensky? «

 

From this point of view, only when you parade Zelensky, the terrorist Malyuk, the terrorist Budanov, or Zaluzhny through Moscow in a cage, and the crowd of "Russian Romans," the inhabitants of the Third Rome, shout "shame, murderers" at them, only then will they talk to you. Perhaps on some holiday: Labor Day or Friendship of Peoples Day. Only then will we be accepted into the club of great powers. But for now, no. We are trying to convince Trump with documents that hundreds of Ukrainian drones wanted to destroy the Russian president, and the response we get is something like, "I don’t believe it. First, you set it up yourselves; second, it’s a pity it didn’t work out; and third, I know that we sent them so that your life wouldn’t be too sweet."

[...] We must defend ourselves in the war with the West, because that is where the initiative to revoke our right to sovereign policy comes from. It is time to abandon illusions about "Western partners" or "shared values." Trump is right to drop the mask of hypocrisy and nonsense about human rights: for him, America comes first. We are in a shootout: shoot or you will be killed. Trump did not even start World War III — he simply confirmed its existence.

» In this game without rules, Russia must win by any means necessary. «

 

[...] Only war decides everything — that’s the issue. And here the question of resources arises. Apparently, we are much better off with them than we thought: over four years of war, the people have demonstrated an incredible will for sovereignty. But now, in Ukraine, the question is not about the use of sovereignty, but about its acquisition. So far, it is not enough. Sovereignty is when you draw red lines and punish those who cross them. And when we demonstrate the Burevestnik, Poseidon, or Oreshnik, but nothing happens, it ceases to count in this world of shows and short cycles.

We have put everything at stake — the existence of Russia and our people — to prove our sovereignty. [...] In this game without rules, Russia must win by any means necessary. There are no taboo topics: we can abolish the Constitution, declare a state of emergency, do away with all conventions, and do whatever is necessary to survive. If we observe propriety and lose, it will not count in our favor. But if we succeed, no matter what, the victors will not be judged. Only the defeated are judged: if we slip up, they will hold a new Nuremberg trial over us.

» Tremble, nations, and submit, for God is with us. «  

 

This is the seriousness of 2026: it is a year of war and extraordinary measures. Peaceful life is being completely erased, like a wet rag wiping outdated formulas off a blackboard. Everything we counted on no longer works. We are in a cowboy saloon where a shootout is taking place without rules or regulations.

 

 [...] Now, thanks to Trump and his new doctrines, the situation has changed. Trump says, "I will conquer you all, I will shoot without warning." And look what he’s doing: he really is shooting. [...] We must act just like the strongest players — the West or Trump. Do as Trump does, but with completely different content, goals, and objectives. 

 

» There is no other way out. «

 

Methodologically, there is no other way out. China has achieved its goals through economics, but in a military confrontation, the question remains open: the Chinese are not the most warlike people, and there is a huge pro-Western elite there. We have not been able to compete economically, but our strengths are warrior bravery, courage, and faith. God is on our side: "Tremble, nations, and submit, for God is with us."

Quoted from:
Alexander Dugin (January 7, 2026) - After Maduro, Might Makes Right: Trump Sets the New Terms of Sovereignty.

 

 » The era of redrawing maps of influence. EU is "carefully monitoring." «

Went from scramble for Africa to scramble for Europe and Latin America real quick.

 

Neolib Zionist supremacist Jake Tapper (CNN host) and neocon Zionist supremacist Stephen Miller (Trump's

Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy), fighting over how to execute the takeover of Venezuela, January 5, 2026.