image copyright, Getty Images
“America’s dominance in the Western Hemisphere will never again be questioned.”
U.S. President Donald Trump made this declaration after the arrest of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.
While President Trump is showing off America’s power, China and Russia are also trying to expand and solidify their respective spheres of influence.
Many experts say these three countries are trying to create a new world order, and that the repercussions will not be spared by both European and regional powers.
We looked at how the United States, China, and Russia are using military, economic, and political means to influence not only neighboring countries but also more distant regions.
A world ruled by power
image copyright, Getty Images/BBC
Anthony Zircher (North American Correspondent)
First of all, the United States under the Trump administration is reorganizing its foreign policy and national security strategy by focusing on the Western Hemisphere.
This is a clear difference from previous US presidents in recent history, regardless of whether they were Republican or Democratic, who viewed US power and influence from a more global perspective.
Regarding these actions, Trump administration officials say it is an implementation of the ‘America First’ foreign policy that focuses on issues that have a more direct impact on the lives of the country’s citizens, such as immigration, crime, and drug trafficking.
President Trump’s close advisor Stephen Miller recently said that the world is “ruled by force, force, and power.” This reminds us of the pragmatic and non-idealistic foreign policy pursued by former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and former President Richard Nixon in the 1960s and 1970s.
But the most appropriate comparison would be the American empire-building efforts of Presidents William McKinley and Theodore Roosevelt in the early 20th century.
President Roosevelt expanded the ‘Monroe Doctrine’ of 1823, which stated that the Western Hemisphere should be completely free from European interference, and argued that the United States should take an active role in ensuring safety and security throughout the American continent.
In fact, at the time, the United States provided financial support to American countries such as Venezuela and the Dominican Republic, while dispatching U.S. troops to Haiti and Nicaragua.
Since returning to the White House, current President Trump has shown a keen interest in the territory and major issues surrounding the United States.
The military operation to capture President Maduro in Venezuela is the most dramatic example, but the United States has already attacked suspected drug trafficking ships in the Caribbean, pressured Latin Americans with tariffs, and supported candidates and political parties in foreign elections. In addition, the possibility of annexing the Panama Canal, Greenland, and all of Canada was repeatedly mentioned.
The White House’s recently released National Security Strategy (NSS) states, “For our security and prosperity, the United States must maintain a superior position in the Western Hemisphere, a condition that allows us to assert our influence within the region whenever necessary.”
But this new international strategy also calls for blocking attempts by foreign powers, especially China, to exert influence over America’s neighbors. This is a point where the United States, with its renewed focus on hemispheric influence, may collide head-on with the interests of the global political order.
President Trump is also showing interest in the role of mediating peace agreements around the world. It also shows particular interest in strengthening economic and security relations with Arab countries such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates.
President Trump and his close associates, such as Advisor Miller, have openly expressed their perception that the United States is protecting Western civilization against those who seek to destroy its culture and traditions.
Putting all these factors together, we can see that even if the US foreign policy is developed from the perspective of ‘America First’, there is a high possibility that the future US international agenda will be mainly driven by President Trump’s personal views and interests.
Over the course of America’s 250-year history, foreign policy shifted from isolationism to interventionism and back to isolationism, with idealism and pragmatism mixed in varying proportions over time. This ratio has varied depending on America’s military capabilities and the interests of its people and leaders.
With the advent of the second Trump administration, the foreign policy landscape appears to be greatly shaken once again, but there is no evidence to conclude that this cycle and change in U.S. foreign policy has ended in the long term.
China’s ‘great revival’
image copyright, Getty Images/BBC
Laura Bicker (China Correspondent)
China’s global influence is not limited to a ‘hemisphere’ or a specific region. China’s presence is now felt all over the world, from the South Pacific to South and Central Asia, throughout the Middle East, and Latin America.
China’s core weapon in its race for global hegemony is manufacturing. Almost one-third of all goods produced in the world, including the smartphone in our pocket, the clothes in our closet, and the sofa in front of the TV, are made in China.
In addition, China has secured the largest share of the world’s rare earth minerals and is in an advantageous position to dominate the future. Rare earth elements are essential elements for making various high-tech products such as smartphones, electric vehicles, wind turbines, and weapons.
China, which is a country that processes about 90% of the world’s rare earth minerals, also used the card of restricting rare earth exports in its trade war with President Trump last year. This explains why the United States is trying so hard to secure mineral resources in places such as Greenland. The two superpowers appear to be in a war for resources.
This is a huge transition for China, which was not at the center of the world stage led by the United States until 2000. As 2026 begins, Chinese President Xi Jinping is emerging as a global leader who exerts power and influence through trade, technology, and investment against the backdrop of growing military power.
Many emerging economies are taking inspiration from China’s rise from one of the world’s poorest countries to a major industrial and technological powerhouse. They perceive that China has achieved modernization without westernization. In other words, China has proven that economic growth is possible without adopting a Western-style political system or forming a diplomatic alliance with a Western country.
And the effectiveness of this strategy is already being proven. As recently as 2001, about 80% of the world’s economies had more bilateral trade with the United States than with China, but currently, about 70% of economies have greater trade with China than with the United States.
China is also focusing on infrastructure development, including investing heavily in several emerging economies as part of its massive global infrastructure project, ‘One Belt, One Road’. The ambition is to connect Asia, Europe, and Africa through land and sea routes by building ports, railways, roads, and energy facilities with Chinese investment.
This has led some countries to become more and more indebted to China.
Meanwhile, one of the biggest questions raised regarding the U.S. operation in Venezuela was whether this case would stimulate China to consider invading Taiwan. However, China considers the Taiwan issue as an internal matter. In other words, from China’s perspective, Taiwan is not a foreign country, but a breakaway province that will one day be unified with the motherland.
Therefore, even if President Xi invades Taiwan one day, it will not be because the United States has set a precedent. Many experts believe that China will continue to use high pressure to bring Taiwan to the negotiating table and will stick to its strategy of breaking the will of the Taiwanese people.
President Xi always speaks of his vision as the “great rejuvenation” of the Chinese nation. Looking down on his country’s soldiers at last year’s military parade, he emphasized that China’s rise is an “unstoppable” trend. He dreams of a world where everyone looks up to and respects China, and calls the current global turmoil following President Trump’s administration a “time of change.”
President Xi will use this ‘period of change’ as an opportunity. He says the world is at a crossroads, and China is best positioned to lead the way forward for the world.
Russia’s ‘near abroad’
image copyright, Getty Images/BBC
Vitaly Shevchenko, Senior Analyst, BBC Monitoring
Famously (or infamously), Russian President Vladimir Putin described the collapse of the Soviet Union as “the greatest geopolitical disaster” of the 20th century.
This is a glimpse into his perception of the area commonly referred to as the ‘near foreign country’ in Russia, that is, the former Soviet Union countries that became independent in the 1990s.
Many people interpret this expression as implying that these countries have a relatively weak independent status compared to so-called ‘distant foreign countries’.
According to the Kremlin’s ideology, Russia has legitimate interests in these ‘nearby’ countries and the right to protect them.
From Russia’s perspective, its sphere of influence is an ambiguous concept, and the Kremlin is intentionally being vague about where it sees its boundaries.
President Putin once said that “Russia’s borders are endless,” and some supporters of his expansionist policies say Russia’s sphere of influence includes all territories historically part of the Russian Empire, and perhaps more. This is one of the reasons why Russia calls the territory of Ukraine it annexed a “historic region.”
Outwardly, the Kremlin also respects the sovereignty of former Soviet states and other countries in which it says it has a “interest.” However, in reality, these former satellite countries have put pressure on them economically and militarily when they try to break away from their country’s influence.
And Ukraine is painfully aware of this. For about 10 years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Ukrainian government pursued policies that largely suited Russia’s tastes and allowed the establishment of a Russian naval base on the Crimean peninsula in the Black Sea.
Russia was also satisfied with this relationship until the election of President Viktor Yushchenko, who called for reforms with pro-Western tendencies, in Ukraine. However, after President Yushenko came to power, Russia suspended gas supply twice, in 2006 and 2009.
When economic pressure and political intervention were ineffective, Russia eventually invaded and took control of the Crimea in 2014, and launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
Likewise, Russia went to war with Georgia in 2008 when reformist President Mikheil Saakashvili came to power in Georgia. This war further consolidated Russia’s control over 20% of Georgia’s territory. Since then, the Russian military has been effectively expanding the scope of its occupation by moving the border stone further into Georgian territory, using a method locally called ‘gradual occupation’.
The failure of the West to respond meaningfully to the invasion of Georgia in 2008 and the invasion of Crimea in 2014 further solidified President Putin’s perception that the ‘nearby region’ is his sphere of influence.
It is worth noting that while Ukraine and Georgia faced military intervention in their bid to escape Russia’s political influence, some former Soviet states still cooperate with Russia. Among them, five countries – Belarus, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, and Armenia – still allow Russian troops to be stationed in their countries.
In the cases of Ukraine and Georgia, the problems began with the election of governments that implemented democratic reforms and expressed ambitions to move closer to the West and free themselves from Russia’s sphere of influence.
And what happened after that is absolutely nothing new. Historically, numerous conflicts have arisen under the pretext of protecting their interests and protecting ethnic minorities.
After World War II and even after the Cold War, efforts were made to build an equal global community regardless of national size or military power. But the current revival of the concept of ‘sphere of influence’ could send us all back to a much darker past.
