In a world where Niccolò Machiavelli’s The Prince is not just a political treatise, but the governing doctrine of global leadership, the man himself stands at the helm, navigating the complex terrain of modern geopolitics. In this alternate reality, Machiavelli has risen to power, not as the ruler of a single state, but as the supreme leader of the world, wielding his philosophy of political cunning, strategic alliances, and military might to shape the fate of nations. The world is his stage, and each geopolitical crisis is an opportunity to test the principles laid out in his writings.

The Ukraine War: A Strategic Calculation of Power

Machiavelli’s approach to the Ukraine war would be pragmatic, seeking not only to preserve his own power but to maintain stability in a region that serves as the gateway between East and West. To him, the sovereignty of Ukraine is secondary to the balance of power in Europe. A war of attrition between Russia and Ukraine would be seen as a valuable opportunity to manipulate both sides, exerting influence over both the European Union and NATO.

Machiavelli would first strengthen his strategic alliances with Western powers like the United States and key European nations, ensuring that they remain united against the Russian threat. He would view the war as a means to divide Russia, forcing them into a prolonged conflict that would drain resources and weaken Moscow’s standing in the international arena. His strategy would involve direct support for Ukraine, but in a way that ensures the war never reaches a decisive conclusion—keeping Russia engaged while maintaining Western unity.

Simultaneously, Machiavelli would offer limited backchannel negotiations with Russia, appealing to their desire for security and status on the world stage. Through these backdoor deals, he would aim to manipulate the Kremlin, using diplomacy to extract concessions while keeping the conflict alive. The goal would be to maintain a fragile peace that favors the balance of power in Europe, ensuring that no single nation, especially Russia, becomes too powerful.

The Middle East: Divide and Conquer

Machiavelli’s handling of the Middle East would be guided by his belief in the necessity of controlling key strategic regions to maintain power. The volatile region, rich in natural resources and historically a point of contention between East and West, would be a prime opportunity for Machiavellian tactics. Here, Machiavelli would apply his famous doctrine of “divide and conquer,” fostering rivalries among the various factions and nations.

In the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, for example, Machiavelli would continue to support Israel, but not out of a sense of moral obligation. His support would be based on Israel’s strategic importance as an ally in the region, capable of counterbalancing the influence of Iran and other Middle Eastern powers. At the same time, he would seek to exacerbate tensions between Sunni and Shia factions, using diplomatic and military pressure to ensure that no single group could dominate the region.

The rise of Islamist extremist groups would be an opportunity to manipulate the power vacuum, using these groups to destabilize regions and prevent any one country from becoming too powerful. By supporting various factions at different times, Machiavelli would ensure that the region remains in a constant state of flux, with no true challenger to his power.

The South China Sea: The Art of Strategic Alliances

Machiavelli’s handling of the South China Sea would involve a careful balancing act, leveraging both military strength and diplomatic alliances. The area is rich in resources and vital for global trade, making it a key battleground for influence between the United States, China, and smaller Southeast Asian nations.

Machiavelli would first seek to neutralize the threat posed by China’s growing dominance in the region by strengthening alliances with countries like Japan, Vietnam, and the Philippines. He would support these nations’ territorial claims, using them as pawns in a larger game of chess. Simultaneously, he would use economic and military power to deter China from expanding its influence too rapidly, creating a façade of diplomacy while preparing for military action if necessary.

At the same time, Machiavelli would engage China in a complex series of trade deals and diplomatic talks, offering concessions to avoid a direct confrontation. He would use China’s internal challenges—such as economic pressures and rising domestic unrest—as leverage, undermining the Chinese government’s stability from within. Through these means, Machiavelli would seek to limit China’s regional ambitions while avoiding a costly war that could destabilize the entire region.

Global Economics and Power Dynamics

Machiavelli’s handling of global economics would be based on the same principles that guided his political strategies: control, manipulation, and balance. He would recognize the power of global financial institutions, like the IMF and World Bank, and use them to create dependencies among nations. By controlling economic aid and loans, Machiavelli would ensure that weaker countries remain loyal to his vision of global order.

He would also seek to maintain dominance in key economic sectors, such as energy, technology, and defense. By securing global supply chains and ensuring that key industries remain under his control, Machiavelli would ensure that no single nation could rise to challenge his supremacy. Through calculated economic warfare, he would use trade sanctions, tariffs, and manipulation of currency markets to destabilize adversaries and weaken their global influence.

Diplomacy and Military Might: The Dual Pillars of Power

At the core of Machiavelli’s approach to world affairs would be his dual reliance on diplomacy and military might. He would view diplomacy as a tool to manipulate perceptions, create alliances, and set the stage for military action when necessary. Military power, however, would always be his ultimate tool for securing his control over global affairs. Machiavelli would never shy away from the use of force when it suited his interests, but he would also recognize the importance of maintaining the appearance of legitimacy and moral righteousness in international relations.

Machiavelli would manage his military forces not only through direct engagement but also through strategic proxy wars, allowing others to fight on his behalf while controlling the narrative. He would ensure that his own nation’s military remains powerful and influential, with the ability to project force globally, while never overextending his reach.

Conclusion: A World Shaped by Machiavellian Principles

In this fictional world where Machiavelli’s The Prince serves as the guiding doctrine, the political landscape is one of calculated power, strategic manipulation, and ever-changing alliances. Machiavelli’s approach to world affairs would be characterized by a ruthless pragmatism, where the pursuit of power is the ultimate goal. He would play nations against one another, weaken his adversaries through covert operations, and use diplomacy to cover his true intentions. His vision of global leadership would be one of constant maneuvering, where the end justifies the means, and the pursuit of power knows no moral bounds.

In this world, the geopolitical landscape would be in a state of perpetual flux, as Machiavelli’s influence continues to shape the course of history. Whether through military interventions, economic manipulation, or diplomatic subterfuge, the world would remain under his thumb, with each new crisis serving as another opportunity to reinforce his control over the global order.