The Scramble for Europe
Last week, JD Vance delivered a speech outlining America’s vision for Europe. Typically, Vance holds little sway in the White House, ranking lower than the person responsible for changing Trump’s nappies. However, this speech marked a significant statement on American foreign policy.
We have all grown up under the post-war world order—an era defined by democracy, human rights, and national self-determination. Western democratic nations embraced these values after World War II, and following the fall of the Berlin Wall and the dissolution of the Soviet Union, much of the former Communist world followed suit.
Yet, we often forget what the world looked like before this order took hold. Under Communism, Russia dominated the nations behind the Iron Curtain, installing regimes that served Moscow’s interests. In 19th-century Europe, global powers divided nations into “spheres of influence,” determining which great power controlled them.
Sometimes, these spheres of influence evolved into formal empires. A prime example is the Berlin Conference of 1884, where European imperialists carved up Africa. More often than not, however, direct colonial rule wasn’t necessary—these territories remained under control through political and economic dominance rather than official annexation.
The same dynamic is unfolding today.
Trump isn’t planning to annex Canada, Panama, or Greenland. What he is doing, however, is redefining America’s sphere of influence. These nations will retain their nominal independence, but Washington aims to install politicians who serve U.S. interests. The UK is no exception—Trump has handpicked Reform UK as his preferred puppet government. This is a modern-day Monroe Doctrine, but on a far larger scale.
Putin, for his part, sees Ukraine as a crucial part of Russia’s sphere of influence, along with other nations like Hungary and Belarus. His ambitions may extend even further. The invasion of Ukraine was a direct consequence of a government being elected that was not under Moscow’s control. Serbia, too, could face repercussions if its pro-Russian government is replaced by a pro-EU administration. Military intervention remains a last resort, deployed only when puppet regimes lose their grip on power.
Meanwhile, America’s retreat from global soft power has allowed China to expand its own sphere of influence across Africa and Asia, while the U.S. prioritizes its core strategic markets. The Middle East is now divided between American allies and a Russia-Iran axis.
Apologies for the rough and ready version of the world map, the exact boundaries are as yet to fully take shape. And people living in countries not allocated to the new great powers shouldn’t breathe out yet. Your time will come.
Yet, there is a significant obstacle to this new geopolitical division—the European Union. The EU stands in the way of Russia and America carving up Europe into competing spheres of influence. For years, Russia has sought to dismantle the EU, seeing it as a major roadblock to its ambitions, just as NATO is. Brexit was a major triumph for Russian foreign policy—and a humiliating failure for the UK.
Now, however, the U.S. has joined Russia in seeking to weaken the EU. That’s why both nations actively support far-right, anti-EU parties. Vance’s speech made it clear: America is prepared to collaborate with authoritarian right-wing factions rather than work with democratically elected governments. Washington, Moscow, and their right-wing allies share a deep contempt for transnational legal institutions that hold autocrats accountable.
Their backing of these far-right parties isn’t ideological—it’s practical. Once in power, these groups can be easily controlled, much like East Germany’s Communist Party once was. The new authoritarian leaders in Washington, Moscow, and Beijing don’t care about ideology; they care about wealth and the enrichment of a small clique of oligarchs. Supporting nationalist parties serves a clear purpose: fostering division, suppressing dissent, and ensuring loyalty to foreign backers in exchange for financial gain.
The irony of nationalist movements willingly making their nations subservient to foreign interests doesn’t faze them. Leave.EU championed British “independence” while secretly meeting with Russian officials. Dominic Cummings is working to merge the Conservative Party with Reform UK under the patronage of Trump and Musk, setting the stage for a U.S.-backed puppet government in Britain.
This is the world we are heading toward—not one of traditional empires, but a landscape where global businesses carve up the world into strategic markets. Nations outside these spheres will face economic tariffs and political destabilization. Oligarchs like Elon Musk and Peter Thiel will continue to do business across all three power blocs, unrestricted by ideology.
These aren’t empires—they are markets. But in these markets, political repression is just another business strategy.
PS I asked ChatGPT to help me produce an updated version of “The plum pudding in danger” the classic political cartoon that heads this blog. But apparently it is not allowed as it depicts Trump and Putin in a bad light
