After Maduro, Might Makes Right

Alexander Dugin argues that the US attack on Venezuela and kidnapping of Maduro was deliberately staged as “meme” political theater to demonstrate Trump’s harsh, rapid, no-holds-barred approach, signaling the de facto end of international-law norms in favor of raw power and compelling other powers to prove their sovereignty through might.

Radio Sputnik, Escalation Host: The most discussed topic of the first days of 2026, which we have already witnessed, has been the United States of America’s sharp start to the year: their military operation in Venezuela and the kidnapping of Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro. You wrote an extensive article on this subject, on how a new world order is being formed. My question to you is: why now, at the very beginning of 2026, did Trump and the United States decide to escalate the situation so sharply?

Alexander Dugin: I think the timing of this operation is due to Trump’s advertising approach to politics: it’s meme politics. The way the operation itself was carried out, the clips that were filmed, the way Maduro was driven around New York — all of this is a kind of advertising video. It is a monstrous, terrifying commercial, timed to coincide with the Christmas holidays and New Year, whose purpose is to show that Trump’s new policy will henceforth be just that: tough, forceful, fast, victorious, swift, bold, and, at the same time, radically sovereign.

The timing is strategic: this is a period when the minds of ordinary Americans are as free as possible from everyday concerns. Against this backdrop, a show is unfolding for a completely “idiotized” population through advertising memes, clips, and musical fragments, where reality is transformed into an element of performance. This is the New Year’s show of powerful Trump, who destroys his enemies and wins wars in a single day. Of course, this is a message to us, too: ‘I solved all the problems in my backyard in a day, while you’ve been struggling here for four years.’ This message is intended to send harsh, sharp, and unambiguous signals to everyone in the context of the new conditions of information policy. We are dealing with a fusion of reality, artificial intelligence, clips, fakes, and deepfakes, which nevertheless come together to form one very important message.

If we distract ourselves from the husk of show business — which in itself should be the subject of serious analysis — we will see new principles of warfare. The element of information support and the entertainment industry behind it play a key role here. The deliberately staged footage of flying helicopters looks impressive, although our militias and soldiers from Donbass have commented: if such a string of slow-moving targets appeared in reality, they would be instantly shot down by FPV drones. They would not last a minute. But here they are, flying colorfully. Perhaps they weren’t flying at all, perhaps it was the work of artificial intelligence, but the informational component here is enormous. You can’t just laugh at it or ignore it — you have to understand that this is the world we now live in. That’s as far as the presentation goes.

Now to the essence of the matter: Trump has effectively put an end to international law. This is very serious. My article is not so much about “how” this was done, but about what exactly has happened in these first days of the New Year. What does Trump’s invasion of Venezuela, without any real grounds, mean? 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. Only in ancient times, prisoners were usually pelted with stones, while here they were pelted with insults and threats to kill him or give four life sentences. In essence, it is the same thing: a defeated enemy is brought in a cage for the amusement of the public.

And what does all this mean? Behind this staged informational effect lies a very serious thing: 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. Specific, meaningless PR is the only way to do these things. If we understand that this is just entertainment, a kind of festive concert or ritual weeping by Egyptian mourners, then we can turn to the UN and give examples of how we were attacked or how enemy drones tried to destroy our president. ‘Well, they tried, and that’s fine: if they didn’t destroy him, good for them; if they did, that’s fine too, apparently we sent them away,’ is roughly how the Americans will respond. 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. 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.” Call it what you will — globalization or nationalization. If Americans see “ownerless” oil or a regime that can be blamed for something (or even not), they simply act. We see them deploying helicopters, striking, and bribing the elite. Without the betrayal of the Venezuelan elite, the seizure of Maduro would have been impossible — the fifth and sixth columns worked perfectly. Over the decades of the unipolar world, the West has created such columns in all societies: in ours, in Iran, in Venezuela, and in China. At the right moment, military, diplomatic, corrupt, and political factors synchronize, and a pinpoint strike occurs.

In a similar way, Israel dealt a crushing blow to its enemies in the Middle East and Iran: in an instant, the military elite disappears, leaders are kidnapped, terrorist attacks and assassinations take place. This is a completely different world, where everyone is now taking a terrible test of war for the right to be called sovereign. We believed that the “spirit of Anchorage” and the possession of nuclear weapons automatically made us members of the club of great powers. Alas, no. To be taken seriously, we need to win the war. We need to prove that we are not just “capable,” but demonstrate “how” we do it. Without this, Russia’s voice will be perceived only as a private, “personal opinion” — this is how people who are dissatisfied with the consensus and grumble on the sidelines are usually described.

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. After all, the previous law arose as a result of past wars: the victors established rules and red lines that were observed until a certain point. But after the collapse of the Soviet Union, we removed ourselves. Why are we surprised now? There is no international law because one of its pillars, one of its foundations, has disappeared. We dissolved ourselves, and who will take us seriously now? We have been declared a regional power that is merely trying to return to history. Putin says: we have already returned, we are sovereign. Yes, we believe this, but now it must be proven by force.

The stakes in this demonstration are extremely high: if we win, we will determine the parameters of the new international law. But Trump is casting an arrogant challenge: “If you are winners, then win. Like me, for example. 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.”

That’s what this conversation is like. What kind of ”Anchorage spirit” can there be here? In order for there to be any real agreement with the West, with Trump or with anyone else, we need victory. At any cost and by any means. How to present it in the media is a secondary question: you can make a film or ask artificial intelligence to draw a picture. But if we are not recognized as winners in reality, no one will look at it. This is a different world in which we’ve woken up in 2026: power rules here, and nothing else.

Trump has proclaimed a renewed “Monroe Doctrine”: the American continent belongs to the United States. Only Washington will determine who does what there. This is a claim to an American Empire in the Western Hemisphere. And since Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua were oriented toward Russia and China, we see the logical result. Cuba faces the same threat. You can call it an unjust violation of the law, but that’s a song for the weak. There can be only one answer: where is our “Monroe Doctrine” for Eurasia? I’ve been writing about this for 40 years. We do not need declarations, but actions that completely ignore imaginary international law.

If we, surrounded not just by cheaters but by murderers, play by the rules of honest people, we will lose doubly. They are playing with marked cards against us. And when we manage to win even under such conditions, open fire begins. We keep saying, “Your cards were unfair.” Listen: there is already a shootout in the cowboy saloon of world politics. Bottles are being smashed, turning into “roses,” and everyone is hitting with whatever they can. This is the new reality.

We have one way out: to defend the sovereignty that they won’t recognize for us. The question is about us as a civilization-state. 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.

We are inside a Western with very harsh principles and a struggle of all against all. It is pointless to cling to the chimera of the Yalta peace — nothing remains of it. Might makes right. Ukraine is the “access card” to the club of great powers.

Either it is ours, and then we are a great power that dictates the rules, or it is not — and then we are vassals.

Host: If we draw parallels between how the US treated Venezuela and what is happening now in Ukraine, I think there is one important nuance. The Americans continue to be present in Ukraine, and weapons are still being supplied there. How does Trump intend to combine his ambitious plans, which encompass Greenland, Cuba, Mexico, and a captured Venezuela, with further involvement in the Ukrainian conflict?

Alexander Dugin: You can see that Trump does not consider the Ukrainian conflict a priority — at least, that is what he says. A number of his actions show that he really would like to freeze this front. And to do so in such a way as to not lose, but to save Ukraine and preserve the Nazi regime (perhaps by replacing its leaders) in order to return to this issue if necessary. This will be a wonderful bridle thrown over us, a constant sword of Damocles.

If the conflict is frozen, Trump will turn his attention to the Western Hemisphere, preparing for war with China and supporting “Greater Israel” in the Middle East, which will likely lead to war with Iran. The Western Hemisphere is only the first step: if the adventures in Venezuela and Greenland are successful, he will go further. In any case, Trump wants to bring the assets of the globalists under the control of neoconservative American hegemony. Previously, it seemed that he would focus on domestic policy, as he promised the MAGA movement, but now it is clear that these were only partially fulfilled slogans. In reality, Trump is pursuing a policy of direct and harsh hegemony, which liberal rhetoric only hinders.

For him, Ukraine is an element of reinforcing American unipolarity at a new stage. Trump is working to get Malyuk and Yermak fired, seeking to remove Zelensky, who is purely focused on the globalists, from the game. His goal is to freeze the conflict through his agents in Ukraine and force us to make peace. If we agree to this (and in Anchorage we have already, in essence, shown our willingness), we will be making a fatal mistake. Trump will not give up Ukraine — he will strengthen it. But he will not respond to provocations, as he believes that by agreeing to a truce even on our terms, we are thereby acknowledging our status as vassals.

We appeal to Trump as an arbitrator: he receives calls from Europe, Kiev, and Moscow, each complaining about the other. By agreeing to these terms, we will accept this status, and that will be the end of us.

War as such is not in Trump’s interest right now — he wants peace in Ukraine so that he can defeat Russia by other means. Peace can be an instrument of war: the Treaty of Versailles was a direct instrument in the preparation for World War II. Trump does not want to fight us directly — it is much more useful for him to “weaponize,” that is, to turn the very fact of the truce into a weapon against us. This is a cold calculation: he will deal with other issues, and Russia’s status in the eyes of the world will be significantly lowered. Even if we triumph over Zelensky, it will not be a strategic victory. Everyone sees this, even in Africa, noting our behavior towards Syria, Venezuela, or Iran: we do not stand up for our allies to the end and do not pose a real challenge to America.

Only war decides everything — that’s the point. 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. For Russia to be a civilization-state, we must win in Ukraine despite Trump. We cannot accept his terms — we must win by any means necessary. There are no more red lines. Nuclear weapons are no longer a deterrent: America already struck nuclear facilities in Iran last year, and Ukrainian terrorists attacked our triad. There are no rules, and leaders are not immune.

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.

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.

Host: Let’s simulate a situation: suppose that, at some point, we really do use Oreshnik as you mentioned earlier on a massive scale on Ukrainian territory. Naturally, this will be followed by mass accusations against Russia. Europe could begin to deploy its troops under the pretext that we have completely rejected international law. Where will all this lead in the end?

Alexander Dugin: Where could it lead? — To strikes on Paris, London, and Berlin, to the use of Poseidons. Only that way and no other. You see, we are talking about international law again, but Trump does not comply with it — and nothing happens: the European Union remains silent. Trump in this cowboy saloon is not a sheriff, he is a bandit. The European Union is another gang. They may be partly with Trump, partly against him: they would gladly lynch him if they could, but they are still a gang. There are no rules.

First: how exactly to use force? The strike must be delivered in such a way that nothing remains of the Ukrainian military leadership. I am not competent to decide how to do this, but imagine: we destroy the top leadership, and there is no longer any authority left in Ukraine. Does Europe condemn this? Who cares. Does it send in troops? Then we strike the three capitals with Poseidons. What will Trump do? It is unknown. He might say, “Well done, Russians.” After all, he himself does absolutely outrageous things, and when it works out, he simply declares, “Look at me, I’m going to dance for you now.” We can do that too. Maduro danced badly and ended up in Guantanamo — here you need to know what to dance, how to dance, and who to threaten.

If they send in troops, we will strike them. Trump might say that they were asking for it, or he may join the war. But those helicopters that flew smoothly over Venezuela: if something like that appears over our territory, our FPV drones will instantly destroy the entire fleet. Even the Americans will have to fight us seriously. And if we are not ready for this, we are finished. We need to prepare for war with the entire West: with NATO, with the Europeans, with the Americans. If we rely on any agreements, it will be a disaster. We have already used this metaphor: behaving like a decent girl when surrounded by pimps, maniacs, and zombies is pointless. What can you say to a zombie? “Don’t drink my blood”? Even the most well-mannered young lady in such a situation will either grab a kitchen knife and turn everything at hand into a weapon, or she will simply be devoured.

Russia is in exactly this position today. Of course, we are not an institute for noble young ladies — we are a powerful country and a great people. We have excellent leadership in the person of our president. Yes, there are still many illusions and inertia from past decades, but society is recovering. We just need to move forward and strike — effectively and decisively. If ten or a hundred strikes are not enough, we need to make two hundred, three hundred, four hundred. We have one goal: to win. And there can be no other goal.

In my opinion, the time has come to proclaim the outline of our victory. We will take all of Ukraine and create a new state together with the Belarusians on our historical lands. After such a victory, Baku, Yerevan, Tbilisi, Chisinau, and Astana will speak to us in a different language. The victors decide everything. Are they trying to scare us with trials and punishments? We have already been punished and condemned. If we lose, they will apply “decolonization” to us, which means the dismemberment of Russia. And if we win, we will write it all off. Winners are not judged.

But to do that, we have to win. We used to think that one price was acceptable and another was not. 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. Yes, it’s not just military forces at work there, but also the weakness of the elites and bribery — that’s how it was in Iraq, Syria, and Libya. They win by any means necessary. Where are our networks of influence? Where are our agents, our ideology, and our targeted elimination of terrorists? The ability to eliminate Budanov, Malyuk, or Yermak is an attribute of sovereignty. It is not a question of cruelty or violation of rights, it is a question of whether we can or cannot. If we cannot, then we must become capable of doing so.

We must act just like the strongest players — the West or Trump. Do as Trump does, but with completely different content, goals, and objectives. 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.”

https://www.arktosjournal.com/p/after-maduro-might-makes-right