The US’s National Security Strategy document lays out the Trump Administration’s guiding principles for the new world order. Drawing on the Monroe Doctrine, the Western Hemisphere, including Greenland, Canada, Mexico, and Central and South America, the US claim, is the US’s to expand into and enlist – recent actions in Venezuela display this theme already being actioned. Furthermore, Europe, the Trump Administration suggests, will no longer be seen as a close or important ally. The document, and the actions already carrying it out, lay the way for a decade of geopolitical upheaval and a new carving up of the world between the great powers across their spheres of influence. Former intelligence officer in the British Army, Andy Owen, outlines the geopolitical themes that will define 2026 and that will shape the next decade.

The End of Ideology?

With the rise of American hegemony at the end of the Cold War, Western liberal democracy was seen by its high priests as the final destination on the journey to find the universal best way to organise a society (regardless of its historical and cultural uniqueness). We had gone beyond competing ideologies. Al Qaeda's religious fundamentalism and the ethno-nationalist wars in The Balkans were seen as the death throes of old ideologies rather than the return of ideologies that we never left behind. The failure of the US to "democratise" Iraq and Afghanistan, followed by the financial crash, escalating inequality and the rise of competing systems of governance in China and the rise of an aggressive Russian imperialism, shattered the illusion that with liberal democracy we had reached the "end of history."

At the same time, it became clear that globalisation had not just stripped communities of jobs but also what defined them. It replaced it with a secularised homogeneous culture they could only afford through debt, and left them governed by political parties they could no longer differentiate between. Into this vacuum of hope and aspiration came politicians who knew the easiest ideology to sell in such circumstances is a negative nationalism fueled by a politics of grievance that acts as a mechanism to turn humiliation, frustration and a sense of being left behind into anger and resentment against “others.”

___

In 2026, Europe must rouse itself to the reality that it is no longer in the American sphere of influence.

___

One such politician is Donald Trump, who surged to victory in 2024’s US presidential election with his American brand of negative nationalism. At the end of 2025, he launched his government’s new National Security Strategy (NSS), which outlines how his foreign policy will support his domestic agenda in his second term. It claims, “It is not grounded in traditional political ideology. It is motivated above all by what works for America - or, in two words, “America First.”” This is not an idealist foreign policy, that emphasizes moral values and cooperation, fighting for a peaceful, just world through international institutions, democracy, and human rights (many peoples around the world who have been on the end of American interventions since 1945 would argue, with some cause, that the US has never been an exemplar of idealism in its foreign affairs). Nor is this a grand ideology that sets out an economic or political worldview and demands others follow, such as the destructive fascist and communist ideologies of the twentieth century. It is a form of political realism with crude aims that builds on Trump’s America First domestic agenda.

Before the term “America First” was used by President Wilson in his 1916 presidential campaign, which pledged to keep America neutral in World War I. It was used by the American Party, who, believing in an alleged Catholic conspiracy to subvert civil and religious liberty, sought to organize native-born Protestants in defense of traditional values, supplementing their xenophobic views with populist appeals.

The NSS also makes several references to the Monroe Doctrine (1823), the foundational US foreign policy establishing the US sphere of influence in the Americas and ending European interference there. The military operation that snatched President Maduro of Venezuela from Caracas and attacks and seizures of Venezuelan drug smuggling vessels and oil tankers demonstrates that, despite the isolationism of America First, the US will still consider military intervention in its backyard, especially when it is against a country allied with its strategic rivals, and offers “oil prosperity” and significant gold and mineral reserves.

The NSS states its goals for the Americas can be summarised as “Enlist and Expand.” In 2026, we are already seeing the lengths America will go to “expand” its influence in states in its sphere of influence. President Trump will need to balance the isolationism of his political allies and supporters with his targeted America First Interventionism.

In 2026, Europe must rouse itself to the reality that it is no longer in the American sphere of influence. Either it builds its own military power to balance Russian bellicosity or falls under its sphere of influence. Russia will not invade across the German plains. It will work to install a network of far-right, Putin-friendly autocratic governments like Viktor Orbán’s in Hungary. Russia's grey-zone activities will continue, as it will need to keep a war economy rolling and manage a community of traumatised veterans, widows and grieving mothers, militarised but pauperised oligarchs and frustrated uber-nationalists who believe Putin has not gone far enough in his wars. Putin’s former chief ideologist, Vladislav Surkov, goes further, claiming that for Russia, "constant expansion is not merely an idea, but the true existential reason behind our history."

___

While politics remains a long struggle to find temporary remedies for the eternal problems of human nature, they have to give people something to believe in.

___

More worryingly, the US NSS speaks of "cultivating resistance to Europe’s current trajectory within European nations," repeats far-right rhetoric on civilizational erasure and approvingly cites “the growing influence of patriotic European parties.” Trump’s policies towards Europe are more aligned with Putin’s than those of the majority of European countries.

The NSS indicates that “the outsized influence of larger, richer, and stronger nations is a timeless truth of international relations”. The document describes a world less dominated by the US, but where stronger powers recognize and respect each other’s spheres of influence. That would involve other powers respecting each other’s breaches of laws, that the US helped shape, in their efforts to interfere in the affairs of weaker states within their sphere.

Outside the Western Hemisphere, for US intervention there will need to be clear national interest. This will include threats against supply chains, specifically for minerals and rare earths (a large part of the reason Greenland is on Trump’s radar). Without national interest, US engagement on issues will be determined by what captures the president’s attention. This means the resurgence of Islamist groups in Africa (including al-Shabaab in Somalia and al-Qaeda-linked JINM in Mali), the war in Sudan, and conflicts between Ethiopia and Eritrea, Afghanistan and Pakistan, and Pakistan and India, may be left to spiral out of control, and in Gaza, on the Thailand-Myanmar border, and Eastern DRC, fragile peace deals will unravel.

Hopefully in 2026 those in a position to be a bulwark to the most toxic ideologies will realise that while politics remains a long struggle to find temporary remedies for the eternal problems of human nature, they have to give people something to believe in, something more than the technocratic management of decline, an offering that is increasingly being declined in the UK, Europe and the US. If they fail, more will come to define their identity, but what they are outraged at, rather than what they believe in. Hope may be found in the part of the world that has suffered the most injustice and violence in the last century; the Global South. Tired of Western hypocrisy, a group of countries from the Global South formed the Hague Group in 2025, to support the implementation of the decisions of the International Criminal Court (ICC). New alliances will replace the Western-dominated institutions, and new ideas can spread to the West. However, profits from new supply chains for minerals and metals that will create opportunities in the Global South will need to be invested in digital infrastructure so technological inequality, accentuated by AI, does not hinder the potential for growth.

Further Geopolitical Fragmentation and Drift

Those looking to develop new ideologies will have to do so in a world dominated by the rise of great power competition, right wing nationalist domestic politics and the retreat of the US from international cooperation. Regional powers are becoming increasingly belligerent, trampling established international laws and norms to assert themselves in what they consider to be their sphere of influence. The US actions against Venezuela have clearly demonstrated that in geopolitics, might is increasingly meaning right.

Tariffs, sanctions and trade embargoes are being used for economic and political means. Strategic manipulation of critical supply chains for economic or security purposes will intensify, especially those supplying newly needed minerals and rare metals and earths. Companies have begun to “near-shore” and de-risk global supply chains. Countries are focusing on self-reliance (China’s new five-year plan, launching in 2026, focuses on technological self-reliance). The invisible hand of free markets is being manipulated by the long arms of governments. Diplomacy around negotiating tables is being replaced by personal relationships done through handshake deals and backroom bargains. A smaller and smaller group of people - in positions of power not necessarily democratically determined - are making the decisions that affect the majority and doing so outside of established processes, motivated as much by personal gain or, at best, narrowly defined national interests.

Whilst states will find it easier to launch missiles, drones and special military operations across borders, it will get harder for people as well as goods to cross them in 2026, with greater use of biometrics and social media screening. As Europe and the US closes its borders to immigration, China may open its borders to balance its fragile demographics. As countries look to close their physical borders, they will look to do the same in cyberspace, to protect infrastructure, control information and limit the impacts of AI. Those developing AI that could provide an exponential military or economic advantage could find themselves increasingly targeted through espionage and even sabotage.

___

If there is to be peace in the conflicts that dominated 2025, it will not be a just peace.

___

Within states, the fracturing of internal cohesion of Western societies will continue as issues such as migration, tax and social benefits are exploited by divisive politicians. Grey-zone activities by autocratic states against democracies will blur the lines between war and peace and attempt to fan the toxic flames of division. Shortly after America's celebrations for its semiquincentennial, it could face the biggest challenge to its democracy with the midterms, which, if favourable for the American incumbent, could embed America First ideology for years to come, and if unfavourable, could be declared fraudulent, causing a severe crisis of democratic legitimacy whose effects will ripple throughout the Western world.

In increasingly atomised societies, the growth of AI could further challenge our individual understanding of what and who is real, as increasingly realistic AI-generated content floods our world, and increasingly sophisticated AI agents will lead us to question the nature of our own consciousness and agency. As any sense of a shared cultural reality fragments, the Chinese proverb, "A dream you dream alone is only a dream. A dream you dream together is reality," will become apposite for our times. We will be increasingly dreaming alone, unable to tell if we are awake or not.

Lack of Justice in Peace as much as in War

The NSS is critical of US elites who convinced themselves that US global domination was in America’s best interests and states that “the affairs of other countries are our concern only if their activities directly threaten our interests.” As the US retreats, there will be more conflicts in which the belligerents will feel that their conduct will avoid the scrutiny of international justice. If there is to be peace in the conflicts that dominated 2025, it will not be a just peace.

In the Middle East, while some in the region are making calculated decisions, balancing security, economic gain and international condemnation, others are still operating by the logic of rage and revenge. The grief of a thousand tragedies led to the rage behind the vengeful violence of October 7th. The resulting grief led to more rage, and, as America was driven by lust for revenge into its Global War on Terror, Israel was driven into wars with similar chimeric goals. There will no doubt be more strikes between Israel and Iran and its proxies as re-arming occurs and fear and revenge continue to dominate decision-making. It remains unclear if the new norms will create a new regional equilibrium or a self-aggravating cycle which continues to spiral. There are some in positions of power who benefit personally from the continuation of violence. The West suffered blowback for its ill-judged post-9/11 wars; in 2026, Israel and the Jewish diaspora will face blowback from their actions, and more tragedy will unfold. The poet Seamus Heaney, on another seemingly intractable conflict, writes;

Now as news comes in

of each neighbourly murder

We pine for ceremony,

Customary rhythms:

Our customary rhythms of protest and outcry continue on as the daily lives of Palestinians remain unchanged, and the violence seeps outwards from the epicentre of grief, pitting more neighbours against each other far from Gaza.

Sociologist Johan Galtung describes two kinds of peace: negative and positive. Negative peace is the absence of direct violence, but underlying tensions and unresolved issues remain, making the peace fragile. Positive peace builds trust and addresses the structural and historical injustices that caused the conflict. It is not a transactional process between two positions that ends with the signing of a deal determining lines on a map, or the transfer of resources. True peacemaking must address underlying grievances: for cycles of violence to be broken, for rage to be dissipated, justice must be done. Ukrainian Nobel Peace Prize laureate Oleksandra Matviichuk, who has sat with victims of Russian war crimes, claims the crimes committed in Ukraine are, “the result of total impunity which Russia enjoyed for decades … we must break this circle of impunity and demonstrate justice.”

Ironically, it was two Jewish Ukrainian lawyers whose work laid the foundations for post-conflict justice: Hersch Lauterpacht, a member of the British War Crimes Executive at the Nuremberg trials in 1945 and Raphael Lemkin, of the US prosecution team. Charges of conspiracy, crimes against peace (crimes of aggression), war crimes, were made, as well as Lauterpacht’s new charge of “crimes against humanity.” The first count made the instigators of the conflict guilty for all that followed. The second built on concepts from Just War Theory that propose criteria to be met if a war is morally justifiable, criminalising aggression as a cause for war.

___

In 1945, the most powerful countries believed an international system of rules was needed to restrict the aggressive wars of the early twentieth century. An increasing number of today’s leaders no longer believe that.

___

Lemkin tried to add another new charge, that of genocide. It describes acts committed with the intent to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. However, Lauterpacht feared genocide would undermine the protection of individuals, worrying the charge would reinforce natural instincts of tribalism, pitting one group against another, creating an “us” and a “them.” Lauterpacht wanted to reinforce the protection of the individual, irrespective of which group they belonged to.

In its first session in 1946, the United Nations (UN) adopted a resolution affirming the principles of international law acknowledged in Nuremberg. In 1948, Lemkin’s work was recognised when it approved the Genocide Convention. The trials laid the foundations for future international human rights laws. In 1998, the ICC was established to investigate crimes against humanity, war crimes, the crime of aggression, and genocide, when states are "unable" or "unwilling" to do so themselves.

Visiting the ICC in 2023, President Zelensky cited Nuremberg to emphasize his call for a special tribunal to judge the aggression committed against Ukraine. Arrest warrants have already been issued for President Putin and Children's Rights Commissioner Maria Lvova-Belova (for the kidnapping of Ukrainian children). In 2024, following an investigation of war crimes and crimes against humanity, the ICC issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, the former Minister of Defense for crimes committed in Gaza.

The dead cannot demand justice. It is the duty of the living to demand it on their behalf, or they themselves will be condemned to at best remain in an unstable, negative peace, and at worst return to a war that risks more lives. Successfully resolved conflicts in Argentina, Northern Ireland and South Africa used truth and reconciliation commissions to manage the difficult balance of the need for justice for those who have suffered against the need to avoid future injustices.

Justice, however, also needs to be balanced with the realities of power. The post-1945 settlement was not a triumph of justice. Sovereign countries were cleaved apart, and Eastern Europe was sacrificed to Soviet power. The Nazi leaders could be tried at Nuremberg because they had been defeated on the battlefield. The victors were also eventually in agreement on the need for justice. The current US administration wants the ICC to amend its founding document to ensure it does not investigate Israeli leaders over Gaza, US troops or the current president for anything he has or will do. If the ICC does not comply, further sanctions will follow against ICC officials. In 1945, the most powerful countries believed an international system of rules was needed to restrict the aggressive wars of the early twentieth century. An increasing number of today’s leaders no longer believe that.

An Increasingly Unpredictable World

In the 1950s, as the post-1945 norms were embedding themselves into a bi-polar system dominated by nuclear adversaries, mathematician and meteorologist Edward Lorenz was using a computer simulation to explore weather patterns. During one simulation, to save time, when running a sequence of data again, he started from the middle of its run, but using data rounded off to three decimal places, rather than the six originally used. This created a radically different outcome. In complex systems, tiny differences in initial conditions can lead to big differences in long-term outcomes. Lorenz noted, “the approximate present does not approximately determine the future.” As the post-1945 international system fragments, our understanding of our chaotic time of transition is becoming more approximate. We lack solid foundations from which to build forecasts of not “The future” but possible futures of varying and changing probabilities.

___

“Now” lasts only a moment before the world resets again.

___

Lorenz used his meteorological observations to found modern Chaos Theory. He believed that, although the outcomes of complex systems seem random, they are deterministic, and, therefore, theoretically possible, from an accurate start point, to follow cause and effects and predict outcomes. Yet, not only do we not have an accurate picture of the complex, tumultuous present, we are unable to track cause and effect through the often inconsistent and opaque decision-making of the coterie of aging autocrats, who prefer to do deals via fickle personal relationships, rather than diplomatic processes. In The Hour of the Predator, comparing these leaders to the Borgias of sixteenth century Italy, Giuliano da Empoli claims that now as then “the apogee of power coincides not so much with action as with reckless action, which is the only kind that will shock people. And shock is the foundation of the prince's power.” Our interconnectedness and the speed of information flow means these reckless actions recreate the approximate present at a dizzying pace.

Black Swan Theory, developed by trader Nassim Nicholas Taleb - named after the discovery of a colony of black swans in Australia, which at that moment immediately changed the long-held assumption that all swans were white - describes unpredictable, outlier shocks that have massive impacts. Taleb suggests we focus on building robustness or anti-fragility to these shocks rather than trying to predict the unpredictable. But we are forward-looking creatures who strive towards desired futures. Unlike our animal cousins, infected by the religious idea of salvation or its secular descendant progress, we find it hard to simply be. Be it the belief that our individual story has a narrative arc, a day dream of a future social or economic destination, belief in man-made utopia here on earth - via a fervent politics that deny our nature or nationalist nostalgia for a time that never existed - or a belief in an afterlife or a soon to arrive technology will allow us to live forever, we cannot help but lift our eyes towards the horizon and strive for what we think we see beyond. If, to better manage the chaos yet to come, we must forecast forward regardless, we should at least have Taleb’s humbleness in our attempted divination and recognise that as we try to outline possible futures, they will contain few certainties and many surprises.

“Now” lasts only a moment before the world resets again. The approaching weather on the horizon is occluded by a wedge of black swans heading towards us. da Empoli believes we may soon come to see that the anomaly was the brief period during which we believed that we could curb the bloody quest for power with a system of rules. Maybe the only thing we can forecast for certain, 2026 will contain events that none of us see coming.