Entering the First Global Total War | Alex Krainer

In their conversation, Lena Petrova (IR, MBA, CPA, and political economy analyst) and commodities trader, former hedge fund manager, and geopolitical analyst Alex Krainer examine the dimensions of what he terms the "First Global Total War," driven by major energy and trade disruptions and broader global market stress stemming from the US war against Iran.

 

» This is not the Third World War. This is the First Global Total War. « 

 

Krainer frames the present moment as a systemic confrontation between two competing models of governance: the Western-led, British-derived system of free trade (globalism)—criticized as fostering a regulatory and labor "race to the bottom"—and the emerging multipolar framework rooted in Alexander Hamilton’s American System of political economy (economic nationalism). The latter is a protectionist, nationally oriented, and genuinely wealth-creating model that was applied with notable success by the United States, Germany, and Japan in the 19th century, and later as sovereigntist derivatives by Korea, Mexico, Brazil, Iran, China, and numerous other nations throughout the 20th and early 21st centuries. 

 

"The Monkey System:" 1831 cartoon attacking Henry Clay's "American System" from a
Jacksonian Democratic perspective favoring limited federal economic intervention.

 

Krainer forecasts a prolonged systemic confrontation with significant implications for global energy production, industrial output, trade, and food markets, arguing that tensions and worldwide wars will persist until the foundations of the current Western neocolonial financial architecture (including private central banking) are fundamentally challenged, ultimately defeated, and replaced.

 

Exhaustive List of Hydrocarbon and Major
 Energy Incidents (Non-Middle East).

 

Since April 3, ten oil refineries, power plants, and energy facilities across

 seven countries have been destroyed by "fires," "explosions," and "accidents."   

 

Escalation of Conflict

Krainer interprets the wars in Ukraine and West Asia as interconnected theaters within a broader strategic struggle. He argues that Western powers seek to open additional fronts—potentially in the Baltics, the Balkans, and around the Strait of Malacca—to prevent de-escalation in Ukraine and sustain strategic pressure.

Energy as a Strategic Lever

Control over energy flows, particularly through chokepoints such as the Strait of Hormuz and the Strait of Malacca, is presented as the central axis of conflict. Krainer characterizes this dynamic as part of a long-standing effort by Western neocolonial financial interests to preserve influence over the Eurasian landmass.

 »  A worldwide naval confrontation centered on energy and trade access. «

 

Commodities Markets and Inflation

On the economic front, Krainer contends that elevated equity valuations are being sustained by central bank liquidity, masking underlying structural fragility. This, he argues, has produced a growing divergence between financial markets and the real economy. He anticipates upward pressure on oil and other commodities, describing current price behavior as slow-moving and lagged in its response to geopolitical developments.

US Air Force General Dan Caine refused President Donald Trump's attempt to access
nuclear codes during an emergency White House meeting on Saturday, April 18.

 

Rise of a Parallel System

Krainer highlights the gradual emergence of alternative financial and commodity networks operating beyond Western institutional control. He notes that many countries in the Global South are exploring paths outside IMF-aligned frameworks, despite the political and economic risks involved.

Reference:
Lena Petrova (April 21, 2026) - Alex Krainer: Global War Expands as Energy and Economic Crises Accelerate. (video)

  

See also:
Jiang Xueqin (April 17, 2026) - US War Against the World, and the Future International Order.
TPR (March 30, 2026) - JPMorgan Maps and Times the Global Oil Supply Shockwave. Really? 
Stanislav Krapivnik (March 27, 2026) - No Energy, No Food: Global System Breakdown Begins.

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.