The most important question stemming from America’s intervention in Venezuela is not whether it violated international law and norms, but what it reveals about the future of the liberal international order. Contrary to what some commentators say, that order is not collapsing, since its core pillars remain in place and the alternatives to them are still weak. But sustaining it will now involve more frequent discretionary US actions, and it will become increasingly unclear where the thresholds for future interventions lie.

When lawless behavior by powerful nations can be carried out with virtual impunity—with no significant international opposition—a civilized world order founded on rules rather than brute force can no longer be guaranteed.

The U.S. kidnapping of President Maduro represents one of the worst violations of international law by a major power in decades. It also reflects the role of Venezuela as a battleground of U.S. and Chinese interests.

French President Emmanuel Macron’s recent visit to China reinforced bilateral ties through trade, investment, and scientific cooperation, yet yielded few breakthroughs on contentious issues like Ukraine or advanced technology transfer, reflecting Beijing’s guarded approach. While Macron projects a Neo-Gaullist vision of strategic autonomy and a “Third Way” between the U.S. and China, structural constraints in France and the enduring weight of trans-Atlantic ties limit the substantive impact of his approach.

Even among America’s allies in the West there is a growing willingness to resist unrestrained U.S. unilateralism. The U.S. must establish a new equilibrium between its traditional isolationist orientation and its commitment to global engagement.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s China policy aims to balance economic engagement with security concerns while ending the UK’s tendency to swing between confrontation and accommodation, but mixed signals have drawn criticism from both China hawks at home and officials in Beijing. Meaningful progress in UK-China relations will depend on delivering concrete cooperation rather than rhetoric or symbolic high-level visits.

Donald Trump’s renewed focus on critical minerals has returned Central Asia to the U.S. strategic agenda, highlighted by a C5+1 summit that prioritized investment pledges, resource access, and bilateral dealmaking over regional coordination. The engagement signals a notable U.S. reentry into a region long shaped by Russian and Chinese influence, but its transactional and extractive emphasis risks reinforcing fragmentation and leaves the durability of benefits for Central Asia uncertain.

China’s Global Governance Initiative contains some clear structural and cognitive differences compared with the West. Global governance has entered a post-Western era and requires the building of a new governance regime that features consultation and sharing.

Donald Trump’s foreign policy is either following a disruptive logic to reshape the global power landscape, or it is merely a series of impulsive actions that undermine the foundation of American diplomacy carefully constructed through the postwar decades.

The new White House National Security Strategy provides a critical window for understanding America’s view of the roles of major powers and the international order. But Donald Trump’s brash and unpredictable personal characteristics are a wild card that will keep the world in suspense.