Washington’s ruling class recognises a material fact: China is now too large, too economically integrated, and too militarily capable for direct confrontation. An invasive war would be catastrophic and unwinnable. US imperialism has therefore shifted towards consolidation, prioritising not global expansion but the tightening of control over strategic regional spaces, above all its traditional sphere of dominance in the Western Hemisphere. This is not retreat, but preparation.
As Eric Walberg argues in Postmodern Imperialism, contemporary imperialism no longer relies on formal colonial rule. It operates through spheres of influence, sanctions, financial domination, proxy conflicts, and selective control over resources and logistics. Power is exercised indirectly but decisively—a framework essential for understanding current US strategy.
The Americas function as the United States’ strategic reserve, providing energy, minerals, agricultural commodities, and logistical depth. Control here underpins American military capacity, industrial production, and monetary power. What is unfolding in Venezuela is not an isolated crisis but part of a broader strategy to reassert hemispheric discipline. Venezuela’s offence is not authoritarianism or corruption—both tolerated elsewhere by Washington—but sovereignty, particularly its insistence on controlling its own oil and trading beyond US command.
This strategy serves multiple purposes. First, it secures reliable access to raw materials. Second, it blocks Latin American integration with China, a major regional trading partner. Third, it weakens alternatives like BRICS, which threaten US financial dominance. Fourth, it tightens the siege on already sanctioned states, most notably Cuba, whose economy depends critically on energy imports. Strangling Venezuelan oil exports means suffocating Cuba.
Many commentators dismiss Donald Trump as erratic. This misses the point. Whatever his personal traits, Trump served his class interests with unusual clarity. He stripped away the liberal language of human rights and democracy that previously obscured imperial policy. Under his administration, US intent was stated openly: the resources of the hemisphere were to be reclaimed, controlled, and defended as American property. The fig leaf of the war on drugs barely concealed this reality. What emerged was naked imperialism, increasingly unapologetic as its global dominance erodes.
This shift signals danger. Historically, declining imperial powers become more aggressive, not more restrained. As relative economic and political power wanes, coercion replaces consent. Sanctions replace diplomacy. Proxy wars replace direct confrontation. The United States today behaves not as a confident hegemon but as a wounded power, lashing out to preserve its position.
This assessment is articulated directly in US strategic doctrine. The 2025 US National Defense Strategy identifies China as the primary long-term challenger, while stressing the need to prioritise regional consolidation, alliance management, and supply chain security over immediate large-scale military confrontation. The objective is not rapid escalation, but the preservation of imperial advantage while delaying decisive conflict. For now, economic warfare replaces open war.
This logic extends beyond the Global South. The United States’ attempt to assert control over Greenland was widely mocked as absurd. In reality, it was entirely coherent. Greenland sits atop critical mineral reserves, controls access to emerging Arctic shipping routes, and occupies a strategic position between North America and Europe. As climate change accelerates the opening of the Arctic, control over Greenland becomes a matter of long-term imperial planning. The episode revealed the same material calculus driving US actions in Latin America: secure resources, dominate logistics, and deny rivals strategic footholds.
This helps situate the role of Israel within the broader strategy. Israel functions as a forward operating base for US power in West Asia, working to fracture the region, destabilise independent development, and block Chinese economic integration. Control here is not only about oil, but about preventing Eurasian connectivity that could weaken US dominance.
The European Union occupies a subordinate position. Despite rhetorical claims of strategic autonomy, it remains structurally dependent on US power. Its alignment with Washington reflects weakness rather than strength. In the emerging great game, Europe is not an independent pole but a managed bloc, seeking relevance through proximity to imperial command.
At the centre of this confrontation stands China. US strategists underestimated the resilience of a socialist system under the stewardship of the Communist Party of China. They assumed market reforms would dissolve socialist control and permanently integrate China into a US-led order. That assumption has failed.
Unable to defeat China directly, the United States seeks to encircle, isolate, and weaken it over time. This involves keeping Europe dependent, Russia contained, Africa fragmented, and West Asia destabilised. It also involves the constant threat of proxy conflict, particularly around Taiwan, where provocation could draw China into a military confrontation not of its choosing.
This brings us to a historical crossroads. One path leads toward escalating conflict, regional wars, and eventual direct confrontation. The other depends on whether China can extend its project beyond national development toward genuine socialist internationalism. To date, China has prioritised sovereignty and non-interference. This has delivered unprecedented growth and stability, but it has also imposed limits. In an imperial system designed to punish defiance, neutrality becomes increasingly untenable. Internationalism is no longer a question of principle alone, but of survival.
Countries such as Venezuela possess the agency to resist US aggression, but that agency operates within an imperial system structured to isolate and exhaust defiance. Resistance in isolation is fragile. History shows that imperialism advances most effectively when opposition remains fragmented.
Nothing is predetermined. The United States does not have a free pass. But the stakes are immense. The great game now underway is not an abstraction; it is shaping the future of humanity. History suggests that such moments resolve themselves not through moderation, but through rupture.
