Thursday, January 08, 2026

The USA Today: a Derangement Threatening the World


 January 8, 2026

Photograph by Nathaniel St. Clair

Hong Kong.

People around the world walked into 2026 carrying a fragile hope that this year would be better than 2025 and 2024, years defined by the horrific genocide in Gaza. After two years marked by genocide, the collapse of moral restraint, and the reckless shredding of international law, there was a quiet desire to believe that dehumanizing actions had reached their limit. Fatigue itself became optimism. Surely the system would pause. Surely something had been learned.

That hope lasted barely a week.

The attack on Venezuela on January 3rd arrived as confirmation. The coercive removal of a head of state through kidnapping. A clear breach of international law. Executed calmly, justified procedurally, absorbed with disturbing ease.

The world reacted with surprise but not fury. Partly because it has seen this movie before—a telling reminder of humanity’s inured psychological state. Many have almost given up on the possibility of a better future and resigned themselves to growing global lawlessness.

That distinction matters. Outrage enforces norms. Shock without consequence merely rehearses impunity. When illegality triggers analysis instead of cost, it becomes precedent. This is how gangster logic enters global politics: not through chaos, but through repetition.

This was not a failure of the international order. It was the order functioning exactly as designed by the mob masquerading as guardians of the global order.

Western analysts and media moved quickly—remember Iraq—to make the event legible, reasonable, and ultimately forgettable. (Sahlane, Ahmed. “Covering the War on Iraq.” In Discourse, Media, and Conflict, 73–91. Cambridge University Press, April 2022.)

The dominant framings were familiar.

First, energy discipline. Venezuela’s oil reserves the largest in the world are described as “mismanaged,” belonging to the US because it was an early investor. Intervention is implied as corrective rather than coercive. Sovereignty gives way to “global energy stability.” (“Trump Says US Is Taking Control of Venezuela’s Oil Reserves. Here’s What It Means.” CNN Business, January 4, 2026.LINK.)

Second, regional stability. Commentators warn of refugee flows, cartel violence, and spillover risk. The United States is framed as a reluctant stabilizerand even a force for good. (Muñoz-Pogossian, Betilde, and Alexandra Winkler. “The Persistence of the Venezuelan Migrant and Refugee Crisis.” Center for Strategic and International Studies, November 20, 2025.)

Third, geopolitical objectives and hegemony masquerading as law enforcement. Comparisons are drawn to counter-narcotics operations. The language of policing replaces the language of invasion. (“The War on Narco-Terrorism in Latin America.” Steptoe. Accessed January 7, 2026.

Finally, the moral escape hatch: “messy, but necessary.” Legal discomfort acknowledged, then dismissed. Illegality is rendered tolerable when performed by the hegemon and endorsed by Western Allies. (de Wet, Alex. “Can Military Intervention Be ‘Humanitarian’?” Middle East Research and Information Project, May 14, 2017. 

And now, Western foreign policy analysts and media are turning a blatant breach of international law by the US into an opportunity to demonise others.  They are warning that Trump has set a precedent Beijing could use against Taiwan or Putin against others. (“U.S. Strike on Venezuela Puts China’s Taiwan Saber-Rattling in Focus,” CNBC, January 5, 2026, https://www.cnbc.com/2026/01/05/us-venezuela-strike-taiwan-china-precedent-russia-ukraine.html.)

This is moral evasion dressed as strategic analysis with the goal of diverting attention from the grave crime committed.

It converts American criminality into hypothetical Chinese villainy within hours—erasing what was done by raising panic about what might be done by their enemies. China has not refrained from attacking Taiwan because it was waiting for the United States to set a precedent. (Ryan Hass, “Trump’s Strikes on Venezuela Will Not Embolden China to Invade Taiwan,” Council on Foreign Relations, January 4, 2026, .)

The speed of this deflection is the entire tell : accountability vanishes, anxiety replaces it, and American lawlessness becomes a warning about someone else’s future behaviour.

These narratives launder power. By converting a breach of law into strategic inevitability, agency disappears. Responsibility dissolves. Violence becomes abstract. This is not analysis. It is anesthesia with amnesia.

What remains unspoken is simpler: the United States acts this way because it believes it can, until that suddenly changes. Resistance is growing globally and hurting it in ways it refuses to acknowledge. This denial, masking deep insecurity in a changing world, drives it to act more ruthlessly. In the absence of producing a transformative leader capable of breaking this spiral, it continues to act as every rogue empire has done, absolving itself because it is supposedly a democracy. That propaganda is lazily swallowed by most of its citizens, then lavishly spread by mainstream Western media. After all, if you can deny a live-streaming genocide and convince many of this lie, you can argue that a leader of a sovereign state was not kidnapped but brought to justice in a country where its own president is a convicted felon who evaded justice.

This is where American society enters the picture. Not as a potential source of resistance but instead often as an enthusiastic cheerleader, a silent stabilizer and perverse beneficiary of the nation’s active pursuit of global hegemony. This is a condition layered onto a culture largely wedded to delusional exceptionalism, white supremacy, cheap overconsumption, and constant entertainment, including foreign wars, crassness, and violence.

There will be no mass revolt. There never is. A few commentators will speak up. There will be sporadic protests, but who really cares? This action was against those foreign brown Others. Some campus statements may be made, but students will play it safe. Big city sound and fury on social media, measured alarm. And then… absorption, acceptance, even celebration. Liberal outrage will surface briefly, performing its ritual role, then quickly dissipate. Democratic elections will be invoked as proof of accountability, even as policy remains unchanged. Apologists will cite the often-made claim about America’s ability to always remake itself and produce great leaders, with no proof on offer, as nothing changes in its geopolitical strategy and foreign policy.

This is not apathy. It is the conditioning that has spawned a deranged society.

Silence and tacit support are reframed as exhaustion. Support of acts of terror is framed as apathy and marketed as pragmatism. Moral responsibility is outsourced to institutions structurally incapable of restraining empire. A deranged society does not need to approve of power to enable it. It merely needs to stop resisting.

This is decadence doing its work.

Oscar Wilde once observed that America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without passing through civilization. (Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man Under Socialism, The Fortnightly Review, February 1891.)  Wilde was diagnosing a condition over a hundred years ago when American decadence was nothing like it is today. For him, decadence meant abundance without ethics, power without discipline, spectacle without responsibility. American decadence today is on steroids, and most Americans, despite being afflicted with this debilitating condition, simply cannot see it. How else does one explain the gun violence, the killing of children, and the total inability to stop it?

Today, decadence has curdled into something more dangerous. The United States now sits on the edge of derangement. This is a society that arms its military to police the world while arming its children to survive their schools. A nation that exports violence abroad and normalizes it at home. School shootings provoke ritualized grief and immediate forgetting.

Immunity and impunity are not failures of the system. They are its operating logic. You cannot normalize lawlessness abroad and expect reverence for law at home. You cannot build global dominance on coercion and expect domestic cohesion. Violence travels inward.

Liberal America refuses to confront this contradiction. It prefers performance.

Brown, yellow, and black liberals sip lattes, issue statements, and decry genocide in carefully calibrated language, all while remaining structurally loyal to the order that produces it. Representation is mistaken for power. Proximity is mistaken for influence. Visibility substitutes for resistance.

This is not a judgment of individual sincerity. It is a critique of political comfort.

American liberalism has become a lifestyle posture rather than a transformative force or a belief rooted in fairness, justice, and equality. It allows moral expression without political cost. Outrage is encouraged. Disruption is discouraged. The system absorbs dissent while conceding nothing structural.

This is why leadership changes fail to change outcomes. The leaders are mere performers groomed by the plutocracy to take office but not make change. Change the President. Change the Mayor. Change rhetoric. Change the optics. Use soaring language to enhance the performance. The drones will still fly. Sanctions will still strangle civilian economies. Interventions will continue. Thousands in far flung places will be killed.

Empire does not respond to personalities or body bags. It responds to architecture.

Europe understands this hierarchy perfectly. Had Russia or China carried out a comparable act, European capitals would already be mobilizing sanctions, invoking international law, issuing grave warnings. NATO language would dominate the media cycle. When the United States acts, Europe hesitates. It calibrates. It waits. This is not alliance. It is terminal decline manifesting as dependency on a bully. Moral language in Europe is conditional, selectively deployed, and ultimately unserious. It appears where safe and vanishes when costly. The media follows the same logic. Events are described. Systems remain unnamed. Complexity is invoked to defer judgment indefinitely.

Latin America occupies a special place in this architecture and the psyche of America. Not as sovereign nations, but as a testing ground, where subservience is demanded and enforced. A zone where norms are trialed, stretched, and broken with limited consequence. The absence of nuclear deterrence matters. Power does not respect law. It respects cost. Latin America has long been denied the latter and lectured about the former. Intervention there is not an aberration. It is rehearsal.

Asia occupies a different strategic category.

The United States would not attempt such an action in East or South Asia. Not because it has evolved, but because it calculates. Vietnam and Afghanistan were bitter defeats which offered brutal lessons. China, India, Pakistan, and North Korea impose strategic costs that limit external interference. Nuclear deterrence succeeds where international law has repeatedly failed.

But restraint is not respect.

While sovereignty may be preserved strategically, many Asians continue to kneel psychologically. They still measure success through American validation. They still adopt American narratives as universal. They still mistake proximity to power for protection.

This is the deeper danger.

Hegemony does not operate only through force. It operates through desire. Through aspiration. Through the internalization of another civilization’s priorities as one’s own. This is how societies become comfortably numb.

Asia would be wise to catch itself here.

History is crowded with elites who believed accommodation would spare them. It never does. When discipline is required, aspiration becomes a liability.

Sanctions make this logic clear. Economies are strangled. Livelihoods collapse. Unrest follows. That unrest is then cited as evidence of governance failure. Intervention creates the crisis it later condemns. Cause disappears. Symptoms dominate coverage. Iran is the case in point.

What is most alarming is not aggression, but the absence of rage. Everywhere.

Hundreds of commentators now debate tactics, alignment, and risk. Very few say the obvious: a society that can absorb this behavior without fury is deeply unwell. A polity that cannot be shaken by illegality abroad has already accepted it as normal. One that cannot summon anger for injustice elsewhere will eventually excuse it at home.

This is not a moral sermon. It is a structural warning.

Empires do not require universal support. They require sufficient numbness.

We entered 2026 hoping peace might finally follow a year of atrocity. Venezuela reminded us that nothing fundamental had shifted. The machinery still hums. The narratives still hold. The silence still protects power.

Venezuela is not the crisis. It is the mirror.

And what it reflects is an empire mistaking immunity for strength, impunity for legitimacy, decadence for civilization, and drifting toward derangement while far too many, inside and outside it, remain comfortably numb.

Chandran Nair is the CEO of Asia’s leading independent think tank The Global Institute for Tomorrow based in Hong Kong. He is the author of several books including the acclaimed, Dismantling Global White Privilege: Equity for a Post- Western World.

Outscooped By Trump: The Strike on


Nigeria’s Real Target Was Venezuela




Image Source: erivative work: User:Profoss – Original work:Uwe Dedering – CC BY-SA 3.0

Trump’s kidnapping of Maduro has taught me a lesson: that if you think you have a scoop, you file it immediately, not only to get the story out first but to warn the world if it’s about something bad that might be coming.

Shortly after Trump bombed Nigeria on Christmas day, I wrote a piece that said his real aim was to send a message to Maduro and that among the options he was entertaining was a SEAL-type operation to capture or kill Maduro. How did I come to this conclusion? I have no assets in the U.S. intelligence community. I was completely running on instinct, and my instincts told me that the egomaniac Trump wanted to eclipse Obama’s feat in sending in the SEALS to kill Osama bin Laden in Abbotabad, just as he wanted badly to get the Nobel Peace Prize that Obama got.

But it was the holidays and, out of consideration for the folks that run my stories, who deserved a New Year’s break to be with their families, I sat on it after I finished it on December 27 and only sent it to Foreign Policy in Focus on January 2, eight hours before the Caracas operation that kidnapped Maduro, in violation of all the norms of civilized conduct among states.

But though out-scooped by Trump, I still think that there are elements in the unfiled article that could be useful in helping us anticipate what could unfold in the days and weeks ahead.  So here’s the scoop that wasn’t.

Trump Strikes Nigeria But Real Target Is Venezuela

The Trump regime’s air strikes on Islamic State targets in Nigeria on Christmas Day may have had symbolic significance but no strategic value. There will likely be no impact on the efforts of the militant group called Lakurawa, allied to ISIS, to establish a base in Sokoto state.

Many have been puzzled by the attacks that involved the use of Tomahawk missiles, especially given the relatively minuscule space given to Africa in the recently released National Security Strategy (NSS) 2025. That brief section focuses on transforming the U.S. relationship with Africa from one based on aid to trade, though it does say, “we must remain wary of resurgent Islamist terrorist activity in parts of Africa while avoiding any long-term American presence or commitments.”

It is likely that the attacks were carried out for reasons unrelated to Africa. One is to appease Trump’s Christian evangelical base. As Joshua Keating, an expert in crisis areas, has noted, “Trump’s sudden interest in Africa’s most populous country was likely motivated less by any particular event there — these are all longstanding issues — than by developments in Washington. Though it doesn’t get a ton of mainstream media attention, the plight of Christians in Nigeria has been a galvanizing issue for evangelical Christians in the US in recent years.” On his internet platform Truth Social, Trump has cited figures from the international Christian rights NGO Open Doors,  claiming that of the 4,476 Christians killed for their faith globally in 2024, 3,100 were in Nigeria.

In her recent book on the key groups that make up the Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement, Furious Minds, Laura Field says that non-establishment Christian groups have an outsized influence in the Trump administration. With the Republicans struggling in the lead-up to the mid-term elections in 2026, these groups’ muscle on the ground can determine whether the Republicans will continue to control the House of Representatives.

The Main Target: Venezuela

However, the main goal of the strikes, in my view, had to do mainly with developments thousands of miles away. It was to signal to the government of Nicolas Maduro that it will face not just attacks on Venezuelan boats at sea but also air attacks on ground targets. This interpretation would be consistent with NSS 2025.

NSS 2025 is an iconoclastic document. It literally dumps the 80-year-old strategy of liberal containment that guided the United States from the post-World War II years through the Cold War years to the post-Cold War years, which was to meet challenges to global capital wherever and whenever the U.S. state saw its interests threatened or challenged.

Next to its overthrowing the 80-year-old American “Grand Strategy,” the most significant departure in NSS 2025 is its break with the key assumption of U.S. security policy since the presidency of George W. Bush (2001-2008), including the first Trump administration (2017-2021): that Washington must focus its resources on containing China, which was defined as the principal U.S. strategic competitor.

Replacing China and the Asia Pacific as the main U.S. concern in the western hemisphere, the document comes out with a reiteration of the Monroe Doctrine, but one fortified with what it calls the “Trump corollary.” It states that Washington “will deny non-hemispheric competitors the ability to position forces or other threatening capabilities, or to own or control strategically vital assets, in our hemisphere.” There is no more stark expression of the rude replacement of the liberal containment doctrine by a “spheres of influence” approach.

Meantime, the debate goes on in Trump administration on whether a ground invasion of Venezuela is the best way to implement the western-hemisphere-first strategy. Air strikes are one thing, boots on the ground are another, and one opposed by much of the MAGA base that is tired of the “forever wars.” The “Molotov Cocktail” throwers in that base have made known their opposition or disquiet regarding a Venezuelan adventure.

Laura Loomer, an influential firebrand, has challenged Trump’s rationale for the attacks on Venezuelan boats, which is to prevent the opioid fentanyl and other drugs from being shipped to the United States. “Fentanyl isn’t being manufactured in Venezuela,” she said, urging that the Pentagon target the Mexican drug cartels responsible for most shipments instead. She has also criticized María Corina Machado, the Nobel Peace Prize awardee for 2025 and the leader of the opposition in Venezuela, for “actively stoking and promoting violent regime change.”

Steve Bannon, a key official in the first Trump administration, said “neoconservative neoliberals” like Secretary of State Marco Rubio are pushing for a Venezuelan intervention that would derail the administration from its domestic priorities. Marjorie Taylor Greene, the volatile Georgia congresswoman, has posted on X that “People voted in 2024 against foreign intervention and foreign regime change as we have seen far too many times how that’s turned out, it’s not good, and people are so sick of it.”

My fearless forecast: Trump will limit attacks on his perceived adversaries globally to air strikes or naval bombardments to keep them off balance and not risk triggering another forever war with a ground invasion. Of course, Trump’s people are probably weighing a SEAL-type special op—like then-President Obama’s killing of Osama bin Laden in Abbotabad in 2011—to murder or capture Maduro, but Maduro is likely to be already very well prepared for such a contingency. He’s not stupid.

Frankly, if you ask me, Washington has dug itself into a hole with its focus on Venezuela, one from which there is no easy exit. If one gives a broad interpretation to Che Guevara’s dictum that the best way to defeat the United States was to create “two, three many Vietnams,” then Venezuela has the potential for becoming the third phase of the death rattle of the empire, Vietnam being the first and bin Laden’s dragging Washington to eventual defeat in the Middle East the second.

Walden Bello, a columnist for Foreign Policy in Focus,  is the author or co-author of 19 books, the latest of which are Capitalism’s Last Stand? (London: Zed, 2013) and State of Fragmentation: the Philippines in Transition (Quezon City: Focus on the Global South and FES, 2014).