Breno Altman: Trump showed that the US is the only global superpower.

247 - In interview with the program good night 247, the journalist and political analyst Breno Altman assessed that the aggressive stance of Donald TrumpThe current president of the United States clearly revealed what many analysts had been downplaying in recent years: The US remains the only global superpower in geopolitical terms....primarily because of its military power and ability to impose its interests "by force of arms." The conversation took place amid debate over recent actions by Washington against Venezuela and the seizure of a Russian-flagged vessel in the North Atlantic.

Right from the start, Altman argued that recent events necessitate a revision of expectations that American hegemony is already collapsing.I think we've all... allowed ourselves to be swept away in recent years by a certain perception that the United States' time was numbered.”, he stated. Then he declared: “The truth is far from that. It's true that the United States is experiencing a period of decline, but the United States is the only global superpower.".

The definition of superpower: imposing interests by force.

For Altman, the definition of a superpower is not based on diplomatic prestige or cultural influence—but rather on the military capacity to act on a planetary scale.What is a superpower? It's anyone who can impose their interests by force of arms. That's what it means to be a superpower.", said.

He insisted that, from ancient empires to the contemporary era, international hegemony has depended on military strength.Without military power on a global scale, there is no world hegemony.“He stated, in a direct criticism of interpretations that emphasize concepts such as 'soft power'.”

"There's a lot of theory... all this nonsense about soft power. None of that is relevant in the world. What really matters is military strength.“He declared, citing the Persian Empire, the Greek Empire, the Roman Empire, and the experience of the Soviet Union as historical examples where military capacity determined geopolitical weight.

China and Russia would still be regional powers.

While acknowledging China's economic rise and Russia's military might, Altman argued that neither country currently possesses a global projection capable of rivaling the US.China and Russia are regional powers, not world powers.”, He stated.

In his assessment, China has growing military power, but it is still guided by a strategy of stability to guarantee its economic development, avoiding a direct and definitive confrontation with Washington. Russia, on the other hand, although possessing a highly trained army and significant nuclear capabilities, lacks the "maritime reach" that defines a universal power.

"The maritime dominance of the United States is far superior…" The United States controls the seas, and you can't be a universal geopolitical power without controlling the seas.“That’s true,” he said, responding to a viewer who argued that Russia had overtaken the US because it was ahead in missile technology.

Altman also warned against analyses that, according to him, are marked by "chauvinism."I have a horror of jingoism… the view that Russia has overtaken the United States is a jingoistic view. It is not a scientific view.”, He stated.

Venezuela as a laboratory for an imperialist offensive.

One of the central points of the interview was the assessment that Venezuela has become an epicenter of the US offensive in Latin America. For Altman, the pressure on Chavismo is not an isolated event: it is a message to the entire region.

"We are experiencing a very harsh imperialist offensive in the region. The situation has changed.“He said, recalling that about a year and a half ago, the largest Latin American economies were under left-wing governments, something unprecedented — but that this has been reversed with victories by the far right and institutional coups.”

He also cited what he called a strategy explicitly stated by Trump himself: a radicalization of the Monroe Doctrine, ironically dubbed by him the "Don Roll doctrine." According to Altman, the central idea is to impose vassal governments on the continent.

"He seeks to impose by force that all of Latin America have vassal governments… that Latin America should be treated as a North American protectorate.”, he stated. “And they say this clearly.".

Criticism of Brazil and the mistake regarding Venezuela.

Altman harshly criticized the Brazilian government's policy towards Venezuela, especially after the July 2024 election. According to him, Brazil erred in not recognizing Nicolás Maduro's victory and in vetoing the country's entry into BRICS, weakening the region and Brazil's own position.

"The biggest mistake… was not recognizing Maduro's victory in the July 2024 election and vetoing Venezuela from BRICS… weakening Latin America and weakening Brazil itself.", said.

For Altman, Venezuela is a decisive battle because the state has acquired a profound degree of sovereignty and autonomy there.In Venezuela, there was a political revolution. The state passed into the hands of the popular classes.“He argued, contrasting this with Brazil, where, according to him, the left “barely and inadequately” controls the Executive branch.”

"Oil for power": the parallel with Lenin

Another striking passage was when Altman analyzed the hypothesis of oil negotiations with the US to preserve the political power of Chavismo. He stated that, given the military and economic asymmetry, Venezuela needed to buy time even if it meant making heavy concessions.

"What matters for the survival of the revolutionary process in Venezuela is not oil, it's power." Venezuela has to negotiate oil for power.”, He stated.

To support his argument, he cited the example of the Russian Revolution in 1917, when Lenin accepted territorial losses in the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk to preserve the Bolshevik government.We have to exchange land for power.“,” Altman quoted, paraphrasing Lenin.

According to him, Chavismo's tactical objective would be to resist until November, when the parliamentary elections in the United States could alter the internal balance of power and limit Trump's power.

The dispute in Brazil and sovereignty as an electoral issue.

When discussing the Brazilian election, Altman stated that national sovereignty should be the main focus of the political campaign and that the US will intervene in the electoral process, directly or indirectly.

"The United States will intervene in the Brazilian elections. They are already doing so.He stated that attacks on Venezuela serve as a message to other countries:Elect or re-elect a government that doesn't bow down to Washington. And what you are witnessing here is what awaits you.".

Altman also assessed that the issue of sovereignty was decisive for President Lula's recovery in the polls the previous year.The Brazilian people are very sensitive to the issue of sovereignty.”, he said. And he added: “The far right... is an enemy of Brazilian sovereignty.".

In the end, he argued that for Trump it is strategic to turn the tables in Brazil, because without that it would be difficult to maintain hegemony in Latin America:Winning the Brazilian election is crucial… The battle for Brazil is decisive."He stated, anticipating intense pressure from Washington."

Criticism from the left: lack of political education and communication disputes.

Altman concluded the conversation by pointing out a problem that, according to him, weakens the Brazilian left: the lack of investment in information, political education, and competition in the field of communication.

"The Brazilian government is not dedicated to informing and educating the people.He criticized the lack of a pedagogical tool in presidential discourse, stating that this comes at a cost during crucial moments, especially in the face of an imperialist offensive and increasing external pressures.