03/01/2026
Against Empire by Any Other Name: Why a Multipolar World Is the Antidote to Modern Fascism
By Ahmed Olusegun Badmus
January 3, 2026.
The 20th century taught humanity a brutal lesson: fascism thrives when power is concentrated, dissent is criminalized, and entire peoples are reduced to instruments of empire. Na**sm wore jackboots and banners; today, authoritarianism often arrives in tailored suits, armed with sanctions regimes, proxy wars, and a language of “rules-based order” that applies selectively. The danger is not history repeating itself exactly—but rhyming with deadly familiarity.
At the center of this concern lies the foreign policy of the United States, which for decades has asserted exceptional authority to police the world. This posture—sustained by an unparalleled military footprint, unilateral sanctions, and coercive diplomacy—has produced outcomes that contradict its stated ideals of democracy and human rights. From regime-change operations to economic sieges that devastate civilian populations, the record raises an urgent question: when does liberal interventionism cross into a modern form of fascism—one that subordinates sovereignty to imperial interest, dehumanizes entire nations, and enforces compliance through collective punishment?
As of early 2026, under the current administration, this overreach has escalated dramatically in nations like Venezuela, Iran, and Nigeria, alongside persistent pressures on others in the Global South. These countries, diverse in politics and geography, share a common thread: resistance to Washington's strategic dictates invites punishment, often framed as defense against terrorism, drugs, or nuclear threats. Yet the methods—broad sanctions, military buildups, airstrikes, and even direct interventions—echo historical patterns of domination, risking regional instability and humanitarian catastrophe.
In Venezuela, the U.S. has pursued what amounts to a prolonged campaign of economic warfare and military coercion. Sanctions, intensified since 2017 and tightened further in 2025, have been linked by UN experts and rapporteurs to severe humanitarian suffering, including shortages of food, medicine, and essential services. By late 2025, reports from the UN High Commissioner highlighted the "disproportionate impact" of sectoral sanctions on vulnerable populations, hindering humanitarian aid and exacerbating an already fragile economy plagued by hyperinflation and restricted exports. The administration's designation of the Venezuelan government as a "foreign terrorist organization" and imposition of a partial maritime blockade on sanctioned oil tankers—coupled with military deployments in the Caribbean, seizures of vessels, and reported strikes on ports and infrastructure—have been condemned by UN experts as violations of international law. These actions, including lethal strikes on vessels and facilities accused of drug trafficking, have drawn accusations of aggression from Russia, Iran, and others, while evoking memories of past U.S.-backed regime change efforts in Latin America, from Chile to Nicaragua. With today's military incursion and confirmed kidnapping of the sovereign leader of the country today 3rd of January 2026, a new precedent has been set with ominous signs in the days ahead.
Iran, meanwhile, endures encirclement through "maximum pressure" sanctions reimposed after the U.S. unilateral withdrawal from the JCPOA in 2018. Despite multilateral efforts to preserve the deal, sanctions have persisted, targeting Iran's economy and civilian sectors even as nuclear-related UN restrictions approached expiration in 2025. Recent designations tied to alleged weapons proliferation—including drones and ballistic components—have further isolated Tehran, contributing to economic strain that affects ordinary citizens far more than elites. This selective enforcement, abandoning diplomacy for coercion, undermines global non-proliferation efforts and fuels escalation.
Nigeria, Africa's most populous nation, has been drawn into Washington's security architecture as a frontline partner against terrorism, yet faces conditionalities that constrain its sovereignty. U.S. aid, including military training and health support, comes amid designations of Nigeria as a "Country of Particular Concern" for religious freedom issues in 2025, triggering threats of aid suspension and even military intervention. Airstrikes in late 2025 targeting alleged ISIS affiliates in Sokoto State—framed around protecting Christians but coordinated with Nigerian forces—highlight how counterterrorism rhetoric masks deeper geopolitical aims, including countering Chinese influence. Such interventions risk inflaming communal tensions in a nation already grappling with insecurity, while conditional aid limits developmental autonomy.
Other nations suffer similar highhandedness: from Cuba's enduring embargo to pressures on Bolivia and Nicaragua, the pattern repeats—punish divergence from U.S. priorities, often under pretexts of democracy or security.
This is not a defense of any government's internal failures, corruption, or human rights lapses—accountability must be universal. It is a defense of a principle: no single state should wield the power to decide which nations may prosper, trade freely, or govern independently. Collective punishment—through sanctions that starve civilians, blockades that disrupt commerce, or strikes that endanger lives—violates international law, the UN Charter, and basic human dignity. It corrodes global stability, breeds resentment, and perpetuates cycles of conflict. Resistance, therefore, need not be reckless or violent. It can be lawful, strategic, and moral. Alliances against domination—not against peoples, but against coercive unilateralism—offer frameworks for collective security, deterrence, and balance. History demonstrates that multipolarity mitigates catastrophic war by dispersing power and compelling negotiation. NATO's existence was justified on such grounds; denying similar logic to the Global South reeks of hypocrisy.
For the Global South, the path forward is clear: bolster regional mechanisms like the African Union or CELAC, deepen South-South cooperation through BRICS and alternative trade networks, diversify partnerships beyond Western conditionalities, and root all efforts in the UN Charter and international law. Military alignments must complement development initiatives—new banks, infrastructure corridors, technology transfers, and cultural ties—that foster resilience without imperial replication.
Labeling this "anti-American" distorts the debate. Millions of Americans reject endless interventions, civilian-starving sanctions, and policies captured by militarist lobbies. The real divide is not national but ideological: between empire and genuine democracy, domination and human dignity.
Classical fascism warned us that silence amid overreach enables complicity. Today's version may don democratic rhetoric, but its consequences—dehumanization, coercion, perpetual conflict—are eerily similar. A multipolar world is no threat to peace; it is its essential precondition.
The future demands negotiation, not dictation. Resistance, grounded in law, solidarity, and conscience, is not extremism—it is moral responsibility. In the face of escalating unilateralism, the world must insist: sovereignty for all, or domination for none.
