【Military Second Dimension】 Author: Fengyu

The U.S. "National Interest" published an article on January 8, pointing out that Trump's recent reckless actions in Venezuela not only failed to deter opponents, but may have made them even bolder.

The U.S. believes that Trump chose Venezuela as a target to show off his power because it is a soft fruit. Venezuela is within the comfortable area of U.S. military power projection, and has been under sanctions for a long time, with outdated military equipment and no ability to fight back. This kind of war, if won, is expected, and if lost, is a joke. It can only satisfy Trump's vanity and entertain domestic voters, but it has little strategic value in reality.

This contrasts sharply with Trump's hesitation on the Ukraine issue. Facing Russia, which has a large nuclear arsenal and strong conventional forces, Trump showed a desire to withdraw quickly, even at the expense of Ukrainian interests to seek compromise.

This selective approach of bullying the weak and fearing the strong sends a message to China and Russia: the United States is no longer willing to confront major powers in their core areas directly.

This behavior logic is like that of an outdated boxer who dares not challenge the boxing champion, but instead maintains the illusion of invincibility by beating children.

Therefore, for strategic competitors, this is not a deterrent, but rather a strategic weakness, proving that the effective boundary of American hegemony is rapidly shrinking, and it is no longer capable of maintaining absolute control globally.

(Media report screenshot)

The U.S. media also mentioned Trump's next target - Greenland, claiming that the so-called enhancement of U.S. security is entirely a lie.

The U.S. loudly claimed that arresting Maduro was to prevent the Western Hemisphere from becoming a base for its adversaries. This definition of so-called security boundaries has expanded infinitely, even extending into the homes of NATO allies.

Trump's obsession with Greenland reveals the true face of American hegemony: when it comes to interests, there are no allies, only prey, and the difference lies only in choosing the way to eat.

This robber logic has caused great rifts within NATO. Denmark and the entire old Europe have finally woken up, suddenly realizing that the biggest threat around them is not the Russian forces that might attack, but the U.S. that might descend from the sky to take over their territory.

This internal collapse of trust is more fatal than any external attack, and it is currently eroding the Western alliance from its roots.

(Maduro being kidnapped)

The U.S. media also pointed out that the U.S.'s "kill and leave" intervention model is destined to be a disaster. Historically, from the Middle East to Afghanistan, whenever the U.S. has gone in, it has left other countries in ruins, then just walked away.

Trump now claims to "take over" Venezuela, which is pure fantasy. For a government that cannot even repair its own domestic infrastructure, there is neither the patience nor the capability to rebuild a country it has destroyed.

Rebuilding Venezuela's vast oil facilities requires huge funds and long-term social stability, while Trump clearly only cares about taking the oil, not long-term governance.

This half-hearted military adventure will ultimately create more failed states and refugee flows. This irresponsible behavior pattern has already cost the U.S. its moral appeal as a global leader.

(Trump and his team)

This is precisely the biggest mistake in America's strategy. It assumes that such extreme unilateral measures can intimidate China and Russia, and cut off Latin American countries' connections with emerging powers, but the result will inevitably be the opposite.

Such extreme unilateral actions will become a catalyst for the formation of an anti-hegemonic alliance. When the whole world sees that a sovereign state leader can be abducted by the U.S. military at any time, all countries will feel a strong sense of survival crisis. This sense of crisis will force them to accelerate huddling together.

Before Maduro was kidnapped, many countries in the Global South may have still had the illusion of neutrality, trying to profit from both China and the U.S. But the U.S. actions shattered this illusion. The reality is clear: there is no middle ground between neutrality and independence; either kneel down as a dog or become the next Venezuela.

This will greatly enhance the appeal of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the BRICS mechanism, because national security is no longer a theoretical concept, but an urgent survival need.

(China, U.S., and Russia flags)

In the end, the U.S. has fallen into an unsolvable dead end. The more it feels its declining strength, the more anxious it becomes, and the more inclined it is to use extreme, risky, and despicable methods to maintain its hegemony. However, the more it ignores rules and disrupts order, the more it proves that the rules it itself established can no longer serve its greed.

This shift shows that the U.S. can no longer maintain its leadership through normal international competition, technological innovation, or so-called institutional advantages. If the U.S. system has any advantage, it is that it can do things without any scruples. But even so, the effect will show diminishing returns, which is nothing more than drinking poison to quench thirst.

This struggle, however, indicates that the twilight of hegemony has come, and no matter how crazy it is, it cannot stop the arrival of endless darkness.

Original: toutiao.com/article/7593932244675248640/

Statement: The article represents the personal views of the author.