Chess Monopoly

Ukraine, Venezuela, Greenland, Europe – pieces in a game

Chess originally developed in India in the 6th century as a military strategy game under the name "Chaturanga," which means "four limbs" and stood for infantry, cavalry, chariots, and elephants. Chess spread throughout the world via Persia and the Arab world, with its current name derived from the Persian word "Shah" (king).

The connection between the game and life in modern times became most apparent in 1972 in the legendary battle for the world championship between the American Bobby Fischer and the Russian Boris Spassky. Fischer, who was Russophobic, said of this battle that it was "actually the free world against the lying, cheating, hypocritical Russians ... They always suggest that the world's heads of state and government should settle their problems in close combat. And that's exactly what we're doing." Originally, he didn't want to compete because the prize money was too low, but Henry Kissinger is said to have contributed to his decision to do so, along with a doubling of the prize money: "America wants you to go over there and beat the Russians."

Under Donald Trump, the US is once again setting out to beat someone, but now it's happening in real life. The pieces in this game are – initially – Ukraine, Venezuela, Greenland, and Schlossstraße Europe. And in addition to classic chess and classic warfare, it's not just about weakening the opponent by capturing their pieces, but also about taking possession of the pieces. The US's opponent is China.

On January 1, 2023, I wrote about the nature of war in relation to Ukraine:

However, this was not about destroying water and energy supplies and other critical land, water, and air infrastructure: No, the area bombing of this new type of war is carried out by media artillery in the imaginary space of the population with the aim of leaving behind a scorched, Russophobic, monocultural, dumbed-down earth in order to pave the way for sanctions and other measures triggered as a result. The concept of Network Centric Warfare 4.0 is finding its way into the imagined space at , from where it is having an effect in the real world, and the war in Ukraine is a test bed for this new quality of networked operations, in which sanctions and the media act as the fifth and sixth branches of the armed forces: a test bed also for whose and what qualifications are still needed to overstretch China.

On January 20, 2025—the day of Donald Trump's inauguration—I wrote in an analysis of the nature of American politics:

In recent years, American politics has been increasingly dominated by the desire to revive its own economy at the expense of the rest of the world and to further increase the wealth of its elites: the original American business model is experiencing a renaissance. "Make America Great" has always been the orientation of the elites: they need the "again" to appease their own people, give them hope, and actually correct some of the consequences of the super-profit-oriented globalization approach of modern exploitation.

This development is certainly linked to the rise of China and the perception that Russia is showing the world that it can take on the US militarily. From the perspective of strengthening the Western alliance as a community, the tragic thing about this is that this policy does not stop at weakening its strongest partners, especially Germany. Under Joe Biden, American politics has once again shed its cloak and revealed its brutal side. When Donald Trump now suggests that Canada could become the 51st state of the US, it seems to me that Europe is already further along this path. We are increasingly becoming vassals of the US. However, Germany itself bears a significant responsibility for the aggressive behavior of the US, and this is linked to the German constitution.

Linking both quotes with the geopolitical developments in the first year of Donald Trump's presidency leads to the conclusion that the war between the US and China is already in full swing.

The combination is the result of moves that may not be understandable when taken individually, but together achieve a specific purpose. The combination usually involves a sacrifice. There are also combinations without sacrifices, but then threats must be used to limit the opponent's possible responses. Otherwise, the range of possible variations would be too large to calculate.

(Max Euwe, World Chess Champion 1935 to 1937)

In this game, Donald Trump is sacrificing, with great glory, the US war against Russia and, in doing so, Ukraine – which in a sense shares the fate of the Kurds in Syria. He is acting on the insight that this war cannot be won and is tying up resources that are needed in the fight against China. In addition, this war – largely determined by the battlefield in Ukraine and the sanctions – has significantly strengthened Russia in terms of sovereignty, self-sufficiency, and military strength, and its continued duration would further reinforce this.

For those who find it difficult to view the sanctions against Russia and what is happening in Ukraine as a war waged by the US, a few quotes may help to shed some light on the matter, because it is important to understand the nature of such conflicts in order to be able to better assess them, but above all to draw the right conclusions for one's own actions.  Zbignew Brzeziński, foreign policy advisor to several presidents and founder of the Trilateral Commission, expressed it this way:

Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be an empire, but with a subjugated Ukraine, Russia automatically becomes an empire.

Victoria Nuland, Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, commented on the support for Ukraine until the Euromaidan in 2013 as follows (from 7' 28''):

Since Ukraine's independence in 1991, the United States has supported Ukrainians in building democratic skills and institutions, promoting civic engagement and good governance – all prerequisites for realizing Ukraine's European ambitions. We have invested over $5 billion to support Ukraine in these and other goals that will ensure a secure, prosperous, and democratic Ukraine.

And finally, let us quote Theo Sommer, editor of DIE ZEIT (quote from 1):

"If Ukraine is transformed into an unsinkable aircraft carrier anchored under American control a few hundred miles from Moscow on Russia's border, this would be no more acceptable to the Kremlin than the other unsinkable aircraft carrier – Cuba – was to the White House nearly sixty years ago." To which Dmitri Trenin of Carnegie Moscow commented: "Any Russian president would seek to prevent such an anchoring of Ukraine by all means at his disposal.

The blueprint for the war from 2022 onwards was then provided by the 2019 study by the RAND Corporation – a think tank advising the US armed forces – entitled "Extending Russia":

Expanding US support for Ukraine, including lethal military aid, would likely increase the costs to Russia—in blood and money—associated with holding the Donbass region.

...

An expansion of US aid to Ukraine would likely lead to a corresponding increase in Russian support for the separatists and Russian military forces in Ukraine, thereby maintaining the conflict at a slightly higher level of intensity.

...

More explicit US advocacy for Ukraine's NATO membership would likely boost both Ukrainian morale and Russia's determination to prevent such a move — and could thus further increase Russia's commitments and costs.

The reason you don't read anything about this war in the German media is that Germany is a party to the war: Russia doesn't talk about it because it has an interest in giving the US the opportunity to withdraw from the conflict while saving face. As in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria, Germany is also bearing the brunt of the war in Ukraine, while Donald Trump wants to use it to apply for the Nobel Peace Prize — at least as far as it seems useful to him in his grand illusion show.

It is a great achievement on his part to have profiled the US as a peacemaker in this war: no one else could have done that – but it is only one aspect of the big game with which Donald Trump is making the world dizzy. His fireworks display of loud and dominant appearances, provocative tweets, media scandals, trade sanctions, grand and insulting gestures, announcements and retractions, and much more serves only to distract, confuse, and weaken—but above all to obscure the focus on the implementation of strategic goals as well as the weaknesses of the US.

The US recognizes that the myth of the protective world power no longer holds sway, that the longing for the American way of life no longer holds sway, that the appeal of Hollywood, Coca-Cola, McDonald's, and Walt Disney is waning. In the face of this massive loss of soft power and substantial weaknesses, the hegemon is rearing up as a ruthless player, using hard power to enforce its advantages worldwide, with Europe as a willing, self-flagellating vassal with its own sanctions policy. While previous US presidents sought stability through alliances, Donald Trump generates power by deliberately creating instability in the world and, not least, among his partners. However, no one should believe that the presidents who follow him want to turn back the clock: the nature of American politics is the desire to dominate the world in every respect. The fact that this substantially weakens the US and strengthens its competitors is another story (1, 2).

While the strategy toward Russia is one of overextension, the strategy toward China is one of containment. Since joining the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001, China has risen to become the world's second-largest investor. This was made possible by massive foreign investment in China itself. From 2002 onwards, China was the world's largest recipient of such investments: while they already amounted to USD 240 billion in 2010/2011, they rose to their peak of USD 340 billion in 2021/2022. The fact that they slumped massively from 2023 onwards was partly due to the flaring trade disputes with the US.

Foreign investment was driven by the "going out" strategy launched in 2000, with which the Chinese government supported companies in investing, merging, and acquiring abroad in order to gain global market share, secure strategic resources and technology, and drive economic modernization. As a result, China jumped from 26th place (2002) to 2nd place among global investors. In the first quarter of 2022, investments reached an all-time high of USD 107 billion.

Venezuela and Greenland were also considered as part of this. China has invested approximately USD 70 billion in Venezuela over the past few decades – particularly in the oil, telecommunications, infrastructure, and mining sectors – making it the country's largest creditor. The oil produced is sent to China to repay the debt. As part of the Polar Silk Road – an extension of the New Silk Road – Greenland also plays an important role for China. Investments are being made primarily in the raw materials sector, but also in fisheries, for which China is the second most important export market. However, attempts to invest in Greenlandic airports and purchase old US military bases failed due to pressure from the US.

It was not difficult to understand that the US's actions against Venezuela were not about drug trafficking – more than 100 people died when boats were destroyed off the Venezuelan coast. Even arms smuggling and the alleged lack of democratic legitimacy of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro did not justify Donald Trump sending the USS Gerald R. Ford off the coast of Venezuela. While the world wondered whether the US would invade Venezuela, seven tankers transporting Venezuelan oil primarily to China and Cuba were detained, and the president was eventually kidnapped. As a result, China loses a supplier of oil, its influence on the Venezuelan government, and must fear for its investments. What can be seen as a reactivation of the Monroe Doctrine, which considers Latin America to be the sphere of influence of the Americans, is in reality only one aspect of the systemic conflict with China.

China understood what the US was really after in Venezuela just hours after Nicolás Maduro's kidnapping on January 3. Without much fanfare, a series of measures were taken to make it clear to the US that China is an equal opponent in the geopolitical chess game of Monopoly. On January 4, the People's Bank of China temporarily suspended all transactions by companies with ties to the US defense sector – namely Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Dynamic General. The world's largest power grid provider, the State Grid Corporation of China, announced a technical review of all contracts with American suppliers – which is surprising, considering how Huawei has been treated for quite some time now. On the same day, the world's largest state-owned oil company, China National Petroleum Corporation, announced that it would reorganize its supply routes, with the result that American ports such as Long Beach, Los Angeles, New York, and Miami would lose 35% of their container traffic. But the day had more to offer: China offered approximately 30 countries immediate preferential trade terms if they publicly commit to not recognizing a Venezuelan government that comes to power through the US. Within 24 hours, 19 countries accepted the offer, including Brazil, India, South Africa, and Mexico.

One day later, it continued. China's interbank payment system expanded its capacity and offered itself as a faster and cheaper alternative to SWIFT. Within 48 hours, there were transactions totaling $89 billion. Central banks in 34 countries opened operational accounts in the Chinese system, accelerating de-dollarization. China's willingness to continue copying the West is evident in its further measure to restrict exports of rare earths to all countries that supported the kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro.

The whole drama surrounding Greenland – the purchase of the island, diplomatic pressure, punitive tariffs – served not only to secure access to raw materials, but also, in particular, to contain China. When Donald Trump reached an agreement in Davos with the "Danish Prime Minister" – NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte – that parts of the island would come under American sovereignty, that the US would gain access to raw materials, that the island would be included in the "Golden Dome" missile defense system, and that the US would have a say in investments made by other countries, the drama was well worth it for the US. The fact that its European partners were once again left out in the cold can be seen as a desirable side effect, and the fact that they are now showing off a little in response is being viewed with benevolence.

It will not stop with Venezuela and Greenland. The overthrow in Cuba could become a reality this year, but that is only a pawn in the game of consolidating the American backyard. It is more likely that they will attempt something bigger, and in addition to Iran, South Africa and Brazil could be on the menu. The fact that they are also concerned about Schlossallee can be inferred, among other things, from the advances being made to the AfD and the increasing efforts to ensure freedom of expression in Europe.

Finally, let's hear from Max Euwe once again:

On the chessboard, there are often positions in which one side makes a concession in order to gain a corresponding advantage. This could be described as an exchange of positional values, as opposed to the exchange of pawns or pieces on the material level. It is very difficult to weigh up a positional advantage against a positional disadvantage. In this area, there is no balance scale, as is the case in the realm of pawns and pieces. Everything depends on the specific circumstances. For example, does having a pair of bishops offer sufficient compensation for a weakening of the pawn structure? Or is the hole in the white pawn structure offset by the hole on the black kingside? The latter case allows for a general answer: weaknesses near the king are usually more serious than others.

China seems to have found its own strategy for this highly complex geopolitical game: strength lies in calmness.

Chess Monopoly en-US.pdf

Download PDF • 274KB