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.
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.
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.
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.
Pierre-Antoine Plaquevent (January 26, 2026) - The Return of Great Spaces: The end of the globalist world order.
» The paradigm is no longer national, but spatial. «
See also:
Alexander Dugin (2025) - Trump, Putin, and Yalta 2.0: Redrawing the World Map.
Vladislav Surkov (2023) - Рождение Великого Севера. (The Birth of the Great North.)
Vladislav Surkov (2023) - Рождение Великого Севера. (The Birth of the Great North.)
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.