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. 

Preventing Empire Collapse | Alexander Mercouris and Alex Christoforou

The new 33-page US National Security Strategy, strongly shaped by Elbridge Colby and personally prefaced by President Trump, represents a partial yet still incomplete departure from three decades of neoconservative pursuit of hegemony. Officially released on December 4, it explicitly renounces any further quest for global domination, acknowledges that post-1991 globalism hollowed out American industry while delivering few benefits to ordinary citizens, and ultimately weakened the United States itself. It faults an over-reliance on allies and proxies that Washington could not fully control—pointedly implying Israel and European-driven adventures in Ukraine—for repeatedly pulling America into conflicts that did not serve its core interests.

 

» The unipolar era is over. « 

 

In place of hegemony, the document calls for aggressive domestic reindustrialization, technological supremacy, and a return to traditional spheres-of-influence politics. It resurrects an explicitly imperial interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine, insisting that no external great power may have any presence whatsoever in the Western Hemisphere and that the United States must maintain absolute predominance there. At the same time, it insists that America must remain the world’s foremost military and economic power and must permanently prevent any rival from ever attaining the degree of primacy the United States itself enjoyed in recent decades.

» Extraordinarily harsh toward European leadership and the EU. «

 

China continues to be treated as the sole peer competitor capable of achieving parity or even supremacy; opposition to Taiwan’s reunification with the mainland remains a clear priority, revealing no substantive softening despite changed rhetoric. Russia, by contrast, is now a power with which the United States must seek accommodation and continental stability. The document is extraordinarily harsh toward European leadership and the European Union, accusing Brussels of delusional thinking on Russia and Ukraine, economic self-destruction, creeping authoritarianism, and the erosion of European civilization itself. Stabilizing Europe, it argues, requires ending the Ukraine war in partnership with the continent’s other great power—Russia.

 

The new operating model abandons the image of America as a "weary Titan" bearing the world’s burdens alone. Instead, Washington will concentrate on its own hemispheric backyard while outsourcing or franchising security responsibilities elsewhere: Europe is expected to provide for its own defense, Asia will be handled by regional proxies, Africa reduced to transactional resource partnerships, and the Middle East treated as a complicated but no longer central theater. These partners will still answer to the United States and pay their dues, yet day-to-day management becomes their problem.

Historically, this precise pattern—admitting overextension, rejecting free-trade globalism, demanding allied burden-sharing while assuming continued overall control, and invoking the "weary Titan" metaphor—appeared during the terminal phases of both the British Empire under Joseph Chamberlain in the 1890s–1900s and the Spanish Empire under Gaspar de Guzmán, Count-Duke of Olivares in the 17th century. In both cases the reforms were offered as salvation but in reality signaled irreversible imperial decline.

» Explicitly imperial interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. «

 

The strategy is riddled with contradictions. While calling for stabilization with Russia, Pentagon sources simultaneously press Europe to be combat-ready against Moscow by 2027; Europeans counter that 2030 is more realistic, and Viktor Orbán openly states that the official EU position is preparation for war with Russia by that later date. The unspoken American ultimatum to Europe is therefore: achieve full military self-sufficiency on Washington’s timeline or the United States will negotiate directly with Moscow over Europe’s head and end the Ukraine conflict on Russia’s terms. Given Europe’s incapacity to meet that deadline, the second path becomes the default—yet powerful entrenched forces in Washington, Brussels, and the broader transatlantic apparatus remain committed to perpetual confrontation with Russia and containment of Russia.

» Franchising security responsibilities elsewhere. «

 

The document is ultimately a fragile compromise between a small restraint-oriented faction and the far larger interventionist bureaucracy. History suggests the bureaucracy will prevail, just as it defeated Chamberlain and Olivares. Moscow and Beijing instantly recognize the contradiction of a United States that urges its vassals to keep fighting while posing as the reasonable party seeking stability; they will not be deceived. Russia, in particular, reads the American declaration that peace in Ukraine and stabilized relations with Moscow are now core US interests as confirmation that time is on its side, that it can stand firm on all demands, and that Washington will eventually concede because it is the United States, not Russia, that now needs the war to end.

Thus, while the 2025 National Security Strategy marks the intellectual arrival of restraint-oriented thinking inside parts of the American national-security establishment and constitutes an official admission that the unipolar era is over, its internal contradictions and the entrenched power of the old order make it unlikely to survive in anything like its present form. Like its British and Spanish predecessors, it may ultimately be remembered less as the blueprint for managed retrenchment than as one of the first formal acknowledgments that American hegemony has irrevocably ended.

 

Reference:

Alexander Mercouris and Alex Christoforou (December 8, 2025) - Preventing Empire Collapse. (video)

  

Professor Shen Yi, Director of the Center for BRICS Studies and Professor at the School of 

International Relations and Public Affairs at Fudan University, evaluating the 2025 US NSS.

 

See also:

 Serge Bernard (2016) - From Conquest to Affluence to Collapse: The 250 Year Empire Life Cycle.

William Strauss and Neil Howe (1997) - The Fourth Turning: An American Prophecy.  

Lieutenant-General Sir John Bagot Glubb (1978)  - The Age of Decadence.

Latin America Facing the Storm: Rallying the Global Majority | Alexander Dugin

Trump is threatening to invade Venezuela, Colombia, and Mexico simultaneously under the pretext of fighting drug cartels. It looks like he is beginning his own “special military operation.” If he had chosen Canada and Greenland as his targets, that would deserve full support. That would be a blow against globalism. As it stands, it is pure imperialism, a direct intervention.

» We must all show what a global majority truly is. «

An attack on countries that clearly lean towards multipolarity is a blow against us—against greater humanity. Israel attacked Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen, Iran, and Syria. And the Islamic world stayed silent, allowing it to happen. 

 

» Invade Canada, not Venezuela. «

 

Now the United States is preparing to invade three countries of Latin American civilization at once. If they follow the principle of each for itself, this will strengthen Western hegemony for a while longer. The countries of Latin America must unite and present an ultimatum to the United States. Right now, we must all—every BRICS country—show what a global majority truly is.

Quoted from:
Alexander Dugin (December 3, 2025) - Latin America Facing the Storm: Rallying the Global Majority.

 

Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro yesterday,

dancing to changa-tronics in Caracas. 

» Suspend Sec. Hegseth and Admiral Bradley for their war crimes off the coast of Venezuela! «

 Col. Douglas Mcgregor, December 3, 2025.

 

See also:

Pepe Escobar (November 28, 2024) - Trump’s Coming War on BRICS and the Global South.

Hybrid Warfare & Strategic Stalemate in China–US Competition | Jin Canrong

Structurally speaking, China–US relations are certainly not good. The logic is quite simple: the world is changing significantly, and China is the variable, while the US is the leader of the original order. Naturally, the US is not pleased. [...] Whether it's Biden or Trump, both consider China their only opponent. This is very critical. America’s power is still greater than ours.

Jin Canrong (金灿荣), leading scholar of China-US relations, American politics, and foreign policy;

CCP strategist; Professor and Associate Dean, School of International Studies, Renmin University of China.

[...] China–US relations entered full competition in late 2017, when the US began to wage a hybrid war against China. It is called a hybrid war because multiple tactics are employed: trade war; industrial war (denying chips and pushing Chinese companies to relocate industries); financial war (aggressive interest rate hikes to extract Chinese capital); legal battles; media campaigns (such as accusations of genocide in Xinjiang); and biological warfare allegations, including SARS and COVID-19 claims.

» Siding with the EU to split the West. «
The China-US Competition, Jin Canrong, August 19, 2025.

[...] There are also sovereignty issues concerning Xinjiang, Tibet, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and the East and South China Seas, as well as opposition to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) through new alliances, like AUKUS (US, UK, Australia) and the Quad (US, India, Australia, Japan).

[...] The first phase involved US offensives and China’s strategic defense; now, we have entered a strategic stalemate. The key to strategic alignment is domestic management. The US faces high debt, declining manufacturing, and internal challenges, while China confronts economic performance issues, social conflicts, and a rapidly falling birth rate. Addressing domestic challenges strengthens both nations’ positions abroad.

[...] The US strategy toward China involves territorial ambitions (Canada, Greenland, Panama Canal), aligning Russia, reorganizing allies (Europe, Japan, Canada), and increasing defense spending to ensure allies can act independently. China, meanwhile, has abandoned its low-profile policy, focusing on active defense and strategic deterrence.

[...] Since last year, China’s defense policy has changed. China has moved from passive strategy to assertive action. Strategic stalemate depends on addressing domestic issues first, then external threats. For external alignment, China should coordinate with the EU to balance the West, manage neighboring relations, and continue Belt and Road and BRICS initiatives. This roughly represents the current positions of both parties.

 

Reference:
Jin Canrong (August 19, 2025) - The China-US Competition.

SCO Summit Ushers in New Global Security Order and Development Strategy

The Tianjin SCO Summit (August 31–September 1, 2025) brought together leaders from more than 20 nations and delegations from over 30 countries, representing half of humanity. Founded in 2001 from the “Shanghai Five” bloc, the SCO has since evolved into a platform of global significance, no longer limited to Eurasian security but increasingly positioned as a central force in world affairs.

Eurasia’s great powers align.

 

The summit adopted the "Tianjin Declaration" and updated the "SCO Development Strategy to 2035", mapping out collective approaches to global security, economic stability, technology gaps, and humanitarian issues. Around 20 agreements were signed covering regional security, economic cooperation, and cultural ties—showing the SCO’s increasingly comprehensive agenda.

The most striking diplomatic development was the warming of "China–India relations". Xi Jinping and Narendra Modi affirmed that their countries should act as partners, not rivals—“the dragon and the elephant dancing together.” China also declared readiness to cooperate with Belarus, strengthening its support for Russia. Azerbaijan’s potential membership was floated, adding complexity to regional dynamics.

SCO Meeting Shocks West: Multipolar Cooperation Destroys Transatlantic Hegemony.

Pascal Lottaz, September 1, 2025. 

Unlike Western alliances, the SCO emphasizes "non-interference, equality, and mutual respect", principles that resonate strongly with the Global South. Many members are also part of BRICS, reinforcing the alignment of emerging economies seeking independence from Western dominance. The summit thus showcased an alternative model of governance appealing to nations dissatisfied with US-led structures.

Indian Business Today depicts Trump's futile attempts

to stop the out-of-control Indian elephant.

The presence of leaders from Mongolia, Turkey, Egypt, and Indonesia underscored the SCO’s expanding gravitational pull. Ceremonies marking the 80th anniversary of the victory over Japan reminded participants of the historical depth of Russia–China ties and their shared resistance to Western hegemony. Symbolic gestures, such as Putin and Modi walking hand in hand, highlighted the summit’s theatrical but strategic diplomacy.

 

» The Dragon and the Elephant should dance together. «

Following Donald Trump's "unwise tariffs," former Global Times reporter

Yang Sheng says the policies pushed China and India to set aside differences. 

 

The summit signaled the "rise of a multipolar world order". By uniting Asia’s largest powers and fostering ties across the Global South, the SCO has moved closer to becoming a true counterweight to Western institutions. 

 

The West relegated to the rank of frustrated spectator.

Together with BRICS, it now represents a complementary pole of power. If China and India consolidate cooperation, analysts see the potential for a profound realignment of global governance away from Western dominance.

 

See also:

Yuliana Titaeva (August 28, 2025) - Who Invented BRICS.