Although American President Donald Trump likes to repeat that he does not start wars but ends them, he now finds himself closer than ever to starting hostilities.
The deadlock in negotiations with Russian President Vladimir Putin over Ukraine and the much-anticipated meeting with Xi Jinping, which made no significant difference in the trade war, have shown that Trump is failing in his relations with two key global powers - Russia and China.
The Gaza peace plan falters
Even his greatest international achievement - the peace agreement in Gaza - stands on the brink of collapse: Israel launches attacks almost daily, and Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, can be restrained from doing more only through “monitoring,” the continuous presence of high-ranking Trump representatives in the Jewish State.
The new war will be a “victory over evil”
In this case, the temptation to present a major success for the country and the world is greater than ever - a small, victorious war that, of course, will not be presented as a war but as a “victory over evil.”
The only option for this is Venezuela, around which the United States has been escalating the situation for two months.
Anything could happen in the coming days - the American press reports conflicting information, according to which a decision has either already been made or is still pending.
But it is becoming increasingly difficult to believe that everything will simply resolve itself.
A large American fleet stationed in the Caribbean Sea
For two months now, a large American fleet has been stationed in the Caribbean Sea, off the coast of Venezuela, and now the largest aircraft carrier has been added.
No one believes in the stated goal - the fight against drug trafficking and cartels.
Trump wants Venezuela’s oil
This is partly because Trump himself has declared Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro the head of a drug cartel, increasing the bounty on his head to 50 million dollars.
The real goal of the United States is regime change in Venezuela, a country with the largest oil reserves in the world, whose production, however, has fallen several times since the imposition of American sanctions in the early part of the last decade.
Trump wants to remove Nicolas Maduro - But how?
The most radical scenario - a full-scale ground invasion - is not even on the table.
It would require several times more American troops than those currently deployed and, more importantly, such an operation would lead to a prolonged, largely guerrilla war with American casualties (no one would count Venezuelan dead), not to mention a sharp rise in anti-American sentiment in Latin America.
Trump certainly does not need such a war
The milder option involves missile strikes on Venezuelan infrastructure, including ports and airports, which would be presented as the destruction of “drug cartel” facilities.
These attacks are supposedly complemented by CIA efforts to assassinate Nicolas Maduro - an order Trump has likely already given.
But this cannot be achieved through the internal opposition of Venezuela or through bribed individuals from the close circle of the Venezuelan President - otherwise, the United States would have carried out its plans long ago.
It is also difficult to expect that American attacks would lead to unrest in Venezuela and that “the people would overthrow the dictator”: the country has been divided for years, but the heirs of Chavez still hold control, and external aggression, even limited, would be more likely to fuel sympathy for Nicolas Maduro rather than protests against him.
The United States plans attacks on Venezuela’s oil industry and military bases
Therefore, a more serious option is also possible: attacks on the oil industry, military bases, air defense systems, and decision-making centers, including the residences of Nicolas Maduro himself.
An attempt to assassinate the president while simultaneously causing the collapse of the country’s governance - thus provoking a change of power or surrender.
The stakes are quite low
The stakes are quite low, but if Trump decides to follow this scenario, the consequences will be terrible.
Not only for Venezuela, but also for Trump’s relations with Russia and China, as well as for the United States’ reputation in Latin America.
Despite the complex, even negative, attitudes toward Nicolas Maduro in many Latin American countries, aggression against Venezuela would drive U.S. credibility on the continent to historic lows.
No country in the region - with the possible exception of Argentina - would support an assassination attempt against Nicolas Maduro.
But even if the United States manages to assassinate the President of Venezuela, it would be impossible to install a pro-American government in Caracas, and relations with Latin America would seriously deteriorate.
Russia supports Venezuela
An attack on Venezuela would also harm Trump’s relationship with Putin, as Russia is the most important ally of the Bolivarian Republic and would perceive it not only as an attack on Nicolas Maduro but also as a serious blow to Russian interests.
It would harm U.S.-China relations
For Xi Jinping, “Trump’s war” would serve as further proof that it is impossible to achieve any serious agreement with the Americans - they will break everything at the first opportunity.
This includes Taiwan: Trump is not currently playing with the issue of the island’s independence and even limits contacts with Taiwan.
What would prevent him from suddenly changing his policy and playing the Taiwan card?
A U.S. attack on Venezuela sends a bad message to Russia and China
Moreover, Russia and China would have every reason to interpret the attack on Venezuela as a deliberate American display directed against them: “Look, see what I can do to your allies and you cannot respond.”
Trump would not be able to prove otherwise, neither to Putin nor to Xi Jinping.
And the Venezuelan provocation could have far more serious consequences than the U.S. President currently realizes.
The post-American world becomes reality
Talks between President Trump and President of China Xi Jinping in Busan were relatively brief - only one hour and forty minutes.
The Americans clearly expected more, given the long list of issues on their agenda.
As always, the most important matters were those not discussed or mentioned by the parties due to lack of progress in aligning their approaches.
These include the Ukrainian settlement, China’s purchases of Russian energy resources, and Washington’s threat to impose 100% tariffs on all Chinese exports to the United States starting November 1.
Attempt to ease tensions… But failure on major issues
Regarding the latter, the issue was resolved during talks between the parties in Kuala Lumpur, the capital of Malaysia, after which Scott Bessent, the American Secretary of the Treasury, stated that such tariffs were no longer necessary.
Otherwise, there were minor deals (including the resumption of Chinese purchases of American soybeans) or concessions from Trump.
In any case, this occurred after the conclusion of the last Plenary Session of the Central Committee of the CCP on October 23, the outcome of which Trump, in fact, tried to influence with his bluff - after all, the agreement had been to suspend all trade relations worth over 400 billion dollars, with catastrophic consequences for the United States itself.
Everything ended in nothing…
The Chinese leader simply strengthened his position, and the elements of dissent were purged from the country’s leadership and the army.
The balance between the market and central governance in socioeconomic development was also reconciled.
There is a striking contrast between the COVID year, when Trump, during his first presidency, tried to isolate China as the source of a global “infection,” and his current respect for his interlocutor, with whom he clearly spoke on equal terms.
And yet, only five years have passed.
What has changed, and what are the broader geopolitical implications of this new reality (also known as normality) in U.S.-China relations?
In response to the escalation of tariffs in 2025, China literally lashed out with restrictions on the export of rare earth elements and their products, including magnets essential for every modern industry - from the automotive sector to the military-industrial complex.
It appears that in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, the two sides managed to temporarily ease their differences enough to allow the two leaders to meet.
But they signed nothing, and these are merely temporary agreements, nothing more.
The door to confrontation remains half-open, and there is no need to guess who is keeping the other in suspense: the one who holds the resources - such as rare earth metals, of course.
Colossal progress in artificial intelligence by China
Another point: in just one year, China has made colossal progress in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the production of microchips for related devices.
This leap was not only rapid (due to the accumulation of a critical mass of technological innovations, including the return of Chinese scientists and engineers from the United States, who had been persecuted abroad as conduits of Chinese influence and even as spies), but also qualitative in terms of the diversity of Chinese developments (DeepSeek, etc.).
The latter simply undermines this sector in America, where years and enormous resources had been invested in such development, and where it was intended to be used to ensure dominance in a new stage of global technological advancement.
The RAND Corp. report… with meaning
But the issue is even broader and more fundamental.
As demonstrated by the latest RAND Corp. report, titled “Stabilizing U.S.-China Competition,” it is time to choose between confrontation with its unpredictable consequences (the study fails to address Russia’s prospects for remaining above such a conflict) and a turn toward détente, similar to the Soviet-American one - or even to the “Concert of Europe,” the product of victory over Napoleon and the decisive role of Alexander I at the Congress of Vienna in 1815.
Once again, the latter point is overlooked; however, it indicates nothing less than the cultural distinctiveness of Russian diplomacy, which brought defeated France to the European political table on equal terms with the victorious powers.
It is enough to recall how Russia was treated at the end of the Cold War, which it did not lose but simply withdrew from: it was punished by the NATO expansion - a decision they now call “the most fateful,” the consequences of which we see in real life today.
Paying tribute
The RAND Corp. report pays tribute to Soviet innovation, to “peaceful coexistence,” whether in the 1920s or the 1950s. That is precisely what is being discussed now.
It is interesting that they do not hide (so as to “sell” this idea to the American establishment) that the policy of détente contributed to the collapse of the Soviet Union, whose leadership lacked a positive program for internal transformation.
But the difference with this détente lies precisely in the fact that China has already undergone such a transformation.
And one could cautiously say that participation in forty years of globalization through its “peaceful rise” was, in fact, just such a détente for China.
Now, however, the proposal is to avoid further escalation with China, whether concerning Taiwan, the South China Sea, or technological competition.
Without achieving any resolution to the accumulated problems, it is proposed to establish contacts at various levels to ensure the predictability of Beijing’s behavior.
However, for now, the Chinese side shows a clear understanding that uncertainty is unacceptable in American political culture and can serve as a deterrent in relations with Washington.
This tactic is most clearly manifested in military contacts.
Therefore, it is difficult to imagine that China, being fully aware of its own strength and of the weaknesses of the United States, would allow itself to be drawn into a web of détente - especially since Beijing continues to study the Soviet experience carefully.
Trump’s confidence hides the weaknesses of the United States
Drawing parallels, it becomes evident that, despite all of Trump’s confidence, the United States now finds itself in the same position toward China as the USSR/Russia once did toward the United States in the 1980s and 1990s.
Washington’s strategic position is complicated by the rise of Russia, which enjoys a vast advantage in nuclear deterrence capabilities.
Essentially, this is World War III, with the Americans fighting on two fronts.
One could agree that, just as in August 1914, the Central Military District of Russia in Ukraine secured for China (then an ally of the Entente) a potentially crucial gain… which is time, while simultaneously opening the path to a resolution of the Taiwan issue, which was first annexed by Japan after the war of 1895.
The list of differences from the détente 1.0 situation does not end there.
The historical West is disintegrating
The Historical West is disintegrating into its own geographic segments, which inevitably sink into their own regional realities.
As with the countries of the Global South and East, for Japan and South Korea, the absolute imperative is their own developmental interests - meaning the preservation of trade and economic ties with Russia and China, with each of which they maintain a balanced trade turnover exceeding 300 billion dollars.
Toyota goes to… Russia… and medieval tribute
Instead of investing 10 billion dollars in American production, Toyota is negotiating a return to Russia.
Trump was forced to acknowledge the importance of Japan’s and China’s energy ties with Russia.
The demands made on Japan and South Korea to invest 500 billion and 350 billion dollars, respectively, in the United States, including in shipbuilding, are provoking negative feelings in both countries - akin to the collection of a medieval tribute.
The countries of Southeast Asia (the “Ten” of ASEAN) account for roughly 1 trillion dollars of China’s total foreign trade volume of 6 trillion dollars.
However, this region’s involvement in business relations with China runs much deeper:
The direct digital payments launched by Beijing are expanding to these and six Middle Eastern countries, providing significant cost savings and, more importantly, potentially shifting 38% of global trade away from dollar-based transactions.
According to media reports, Japan’s new Prime Minister, S. Takaichi, wishes to cooperate with Korea in introducing a similar trilateral payment system with Beijing.
This adds to what is already happening on this front within the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU).
Americans as foreigners
Perhaps that is why Trump did not attend the APEC summit - that celebration where the Americans suddenly felt like foreigners, despite the warmth and glow of allied relations.
As Clinton said, “It’s the economy, stupid!” - on both a regional and global scale.
The Pax Americana is fading
Thus, East Asia and the broader region are rapidly disconnecting from the Pax Americana (Australia being no exception), even as America itself faces an economic collapse triggered by a stock market crash that sparks a genuine reindustrialization of the country - and no one wants to be caught in the crossfire.
The fact that Trump appeared somewhat subdued after his meeting with Xi can mean only one thing: there, in East Asia, he did not encounter a ghost (one that has hovered over America for a long time), but rather the reality of a post-American world.
No one has yet asked him who he is or what America is - but that moment is not far off.
There is that proverbial caravan, moving beyond America and the geopolitical fantasies of its elites.
Therefore, regarding the Ukrainian conflict, the answer is “let them fight” - that is, let the natural course of events decide, meaning the stronger will prevail.
And then, good relations with the Kremlin are not a luxury, but an almost Kantian (what is Kaliningrad to NATO!) categorical imperative.
And as if the discussion with Xi Jinping were not enough, the news of the two strategic unmanned aerial systems of Russia should have shown Trump that the world has changed irreversibly - and that the entry ticket now is respect for the rights and interests of other, equally powerful and equally sovereign powers.
Nothing can be done
RAND continues to devise strategies designed to create the illusion that something can be done - short of a sharp change of course - when, in the end, nothing can be done.
One can only hope that China will not be as merciless toward America as the British were toward America during the Opium Wars.
Sooner or later, the Americans will have to recognize that the absolute resource of foreign policy is the internal condition of their own country - and that is where they must begin, which perhaps is the mission of the “Trump the Destroyer” (Antonio Scaramucci).
In 2014, Francis Fukuyama acknowledged that America cannot heal without institutional upheavals.
We know this from Russian experience.
That is simply how the world works.
And this will also be the price of the fateful 1994 decision to expand NATO, which postponed America’s transformation - without which it will be unable to rediscover the reality of the United States, which continues to rely on the market bubble for its survival.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών