The Convergence of Retribution and Realignment: An Exhaustive Strategic Analysis of the Trump-Russia-China Triad (2025)

by Gemini 3.0, Deep Research. Warning, LLMs may hallucinate!

Executive Preface

This comprehensive strategic report investigates a dual-pronged hypothesis regarding the geopolitical and domestic orientation of the United States Executive Branch in 2025. The inquiry posits two interrelated claims: first, that the Trump administration harbors a fundamental animus toward the prevailing American state apparatus—interpreted as “hating America”—and utilizes the Russian Federation as an instrument of retaliation against it; and second, that the Russian Federation harbors deep-seated anxieties regarding Chinese territorial and hegemonic expansion—wishing China to become “smaller”—and seeks United States assistance to contain this threat.

To address these assertions, this report synthesizes intelligence findings, academic discourse analysis, leaked state security documents, and geopolitical strategy papers. The analysis reveals that the user’s hypothesis, while couched in emotive language, correctly identifies the structural mechanics of the emerging global order. The administration’s “retaliation” is operationalized through the dismantling of the “Deep State” and the Atlanticist alliance structure, a move that functionally aligns with Russian strategic interests. Simultaneously, classified disclosures from within the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) confirm acute fears of Chinese “stealth annexation” in the Russian Far East, validating the premise that Moscow actively seeks a counterbalance to Beijing’s rising hegemony.

This document is structured to provide an exhaustive, monograph-level examination of these dynamics, moving from the domestic political psychology of the Trump administration to the clandestine intelligence battles on the Sino-Russian border, and finally to the grand strategic maneuvers of the “Reverse Kissinger” doctrine.

Part I: The Anatomy of Domestic Retribution

1.1 The Rhetoric of Hate vs. The Strategy of Dismantlement

The assertion that the “Trump family hates America” requires a precise definition of terms within the context of political psychology and critical discourse analysis. The available research indicates that the administration’s animus is not directed at the nation as a geographic or demographic entity, but rather at the institutional architecture of the federal government—often referred to as the “Administrative State” or “Deep State”—and the liberal international order it upholds.

1.1.1 Strategic Victimhood and the Narrative of Persecution

Analysis of presidential rhetoric during the 2024 campaign and the subsequent 2025 term reveals a consistent deployment of “strategic victimhood.” This rhetorical device constructs a binary world where the President and his supporters are portrayed as victims of a corrupt elite that has “stolen” the country.¹ In this narrative framework, the institutions of the state—the Department of Justice (DOJ), the intelligence community, and the military leadership—are recast as the “enemies of the people.”

Consequently, actions that critics interpret as “hating America” are framed internally as “saving America” from a parasitic occupation by liberal elites. The “retaliation” referenced in the user’s query is explicitly articulated in administration discourse. The President has repeatedly utilized the concept of retribution, positioning his return to power as the ultimate vindication against the “witch hunts” and “hoaxes” of previous years.¹ This rhetoric serves a dual purpose: it delegitimizes the existing legal and political order, and it provides a moral license for the dismantling of democratic guardrails.

1.1.2 The Imperial Presidency as a Mechanism of Retaliation

The transition from rhetoric to policy in 2025 has been marked by the implementation of what constitutional scholars describe as an “Imperial Presidency”.³ This operational framework is designed to concentrate executive power and remove the checks and balances that previously constrained the President.

• Weaponization of the Justice Department: The administration has moved to erase the traditional independence of the DOJ. By asserting that Article II of the Constitution grants the President “maximum discretion” over law enforcement, the executive branch has initiated investigations into political opponents, former officials, and civil society critics.² This is the “retaliation” in its most direct legal form—using the state’s coercive power to punish those identified as internal enemies.

• The Purge of the Civil Service: The reintroduction and expansion of “Schedule F” executive orders have stripped civil service protections from tens of thousands of federal employees. This allows for the mass termination of non-partisan experts, replaced by political loyalists vetted for ideological alignment. The explicit goal is to hollow out the “Deep State” capability to resist presidential directives, effectively destroying the institutional memory and operational continuity of the federal government.³

• Politicization of the Military: The firing of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and other senior military leaders signals a determination to bring the armed forces under direct personal control, removing the military as a potential constitutional bulwark against executive overreach.³

These actions confirm the first part of the user’s hypothesis: there is a concerted campaign of retaliation. However, the target is the institutional America, not the territorialAmerica. The role of Russia in this domestic equation is subtle but critical. By aligning with Russia and adopting its grievances against the Western liberal order, the administration validates its own domestic war against the “globalists” who built that order.

1.2 The Russian Nexus: From Election Interference to Ideological Convergence

The user’s claim that the Trump family wants to “use Russia” to retaliate against America finds its historical roots in the 2016 election and evolves into a complex ideological partnership in 2025.

1.2.1 The Legacy of 2016

The Senate Intelligence Committee’s bipartisan report on Russian interference established a baseline for understanding this relationship. The committee found that the Russian government engaged in an aggressive, multi-faceted effort to influence the election, and that the Trump campaign sought to maximize the impact of these efforts, particularly the WikiLeaks releases of hacked Democratic emails.⁴ While the committee did not charge the campaign with a criminal conspiracy, it identified a “grave counterintelligence threat” arising from the campaign’s willingness to accept foreign assistance.⁵

This historical context is crucial because it established a pattern of behavior: the willingness to utilize a foreign adversary’s capabilities to achieve domestic political victory. In 2025, this pattern has graduated from tactical opportunism to strategic alignment.

1.2.2 The “Reverse Kissinger” as Domestic Validation

The “Reverse Kissinger” strategy—aligning with Russia to counter China—serves a potent domestic political function. It allows the administration to frame its abandonment of traditional alliances (NATO, EU) not as isolationism, but as “smart” realpolitik.⁶

• Vindication of the “Hoax” Narrative: By normalizing relations with Putin, the administration retroactively attempts to delegitimize the “Russia Hoax” narrative. If Russia is an ally, then the investigations of 2016-2020 were misguided persecutions by the “Deep State”.²

• Cultural Alignment: The convergence goes beyond geopolitics. The Russian state’s promotion of “traditional values,” anti-LGBTQ+ policies, and nationalism resonates with the cultural priorities of the administration’s base. Aleksandr Dugin, a prominent Russian ideologue, has explicitly praised the “American heartland” while condemning the “liberal coastal elites,” mirroring the administration’s own domestic dichotomy.⁹

Thus, the administration “uses Russia” not to bomb American cities, but to bombard American institutions and values. Russia serves as the external validator of the administration’s internal revolution.

Part II: The Geopolitical Pivot – The “Reverse Kissinger” Doctrine

2.1 The Strategic Shift of 2025

The 2025 National Security Strategy (NSS) represents a watershed moment in American foreign policy, formally pivoting away from the dual-containment of Russia and China toward a singular focus on the economic and hegemonic threat posed by the People’s Republic of China.¹⁰

2.1.1 Dismantling the Dual-Front War

Previous administrations characterized both Russia and China as revisionist powers intent on reshaping the global order. The 2025 NSS, however, decouples these threats. It reframes Russia not as an “acute threat” but as a potential partner to be “managed,” while elevating China to the status of a singular existential economic adversary.10

This shift is predicated on the belief that the United States lacks the capacity to confront two nuclear-armed great powers simultaneously. Therefore, the administration has adopted the logic of the “Reverse Kissinger”: just as Nixon went to Beijing to isolate Moscow, the President now seeks a path to Moscow to isolate Beijing.7

2.1.2 The Logic of the “Three-Body Problem”

International relations theorists describe the US-China-Russia triangle as a “Geopolitical Three-Body Problem,” characterized by non-linear dynamics and instability.12 In this system, the optimal position is to be one of two powers aligned against the third. For the past decade, the US has driven Russia and China together, placing itself in the minority position.

The 2025 strategy seeks to flip this dynamic. By offering Russia concessions—likely including the recognition of territorial gains in Ukraine and the lifting of sanctions—the US hopes to peel Moscow away from the “No Limits” partnership with Beijing.6

2.1.3 Skepticism and Structural Barriers

The execution of this strategy faces immense hurdles, primarily due to the deep economic integration between Russia and China.

• Economic Dependency: China is Russia’s economic lifeline, absorbing the energy exports that Europe rejected and providing critical dual-use technologies for the Russian military-industrial complex.¹¹ In 2023 alone, bilateral trade reached $240 billion, a figure that has likely grown by 2025.¹¹

• The “No Limits” Partnership: The diplomatic and military ties between Moscow and Beijing are robust. Joint naval patrols, technological cooperation, and shared authoritarian resilience create a “gravitational pull” that is difficult for Washington to break.⁶

However, despite these structural barriers, the user’s intuition regarding Russia’s desire to see China “smaller” or contained is validated by highly sensitive intelligence regarding the Russian Far East.

Part III: The Dragon at the Gates – Russian Anxiety and Chinese Expansion

3.1 The Hidden War: Leaked FSB Assessments

While the Kremlin projects an image of unwavering friendship with Beijing, leaked documents from the Federal Security Service (FSB) reveal a security establishment gripped by paranoia regarding Chinese intentions. These documents, originating from the FSB’s Department of Counterintelligence Operations (DKRO), paint a picture of a “tense and dynamically developing intelligence battle” in the shadows.¹⁵

3.1.1 The “Stealth Annexation” of the Far East

The most explosive revelation from the leaks is the FSB’s assessment that China is engaged in a long-term strategy of “annexation by stealth” in the Russian Far East.15 This region, rich in natural resources but sparsely populated, is viewed by Chinese nationalists as historically Chinese territory aimed to be reclaimed.

The mechanisms of this encroachment identified by the FSB include:

• Demographic Infiltration: The facilitation of Chinese migration into key border cities like Vladivostok and Khabarovsk, creating local dependencies on Chinese labor and commerce.¹⁷

• Economic Capture: The systematic acquisition of critical infrastructure and resource extraction rights, often financed through loans that create debt traps for local Russian governments.¹⁵

• Ideological Subversion: The promotion of historical narratives that question the legitimacy of the 19th-century treaties (Aigun and Peking) that ceded the territory to Russia.¹⁵

3.1.2 The “Unequal Treaties” and Historical Revanchism

The concept of “Outer Manchuria” is central to this tension. In 1858 and 1860, a weakened Qing Dynasty ceded over 1 million square kilometers of territory to the Russian Empire. While the Chinese Communist Party officially recognizes the current borders, the FSB notes with alarm that Chinese state maps published in 2023 revived the use of Chinese names for Russian cities (e.g., Haishenwai for Vladivostok).16

For the Russian security state, this is not merely symbolic; it is a signal of intent. The FSB documents warn that Beijing views its support for Russia’s war in Ukraine as a transactional debt, one that may eventually be collected in the form of territorial concessions or de facto sovereignty over the Far East.15

3.2 The Demographic and Economic Imbalance

The anxiety in Moscow is driven by brutal arithmetic. The Russian Far East is home to approximately 6-8 million people and is suffering from depopulation. Across the Amur River, the Chinese provinces of Heilongjiang, Jilin, and Liaoning are home to over 100 million people with a voracious appetite for resources.19

This imbalance creates a “vacuum” effect. As Russia pours its blood and treasure into the war in Ukraine, the Eastern Military District has been hollowed out, leaving the border with China virtually undefended.15 The FSB fears that China is simply waiting for a moment of critical Russian weakness—potentially a post-Putin collapse—to assert control.15

3.3 Aleksandr Dugin and the Geopolitics of Dismemberment

The user’s claim that Russia wants China to become “smaller” resonates with the writings of influential Russian strategists. Aleksandr Dugin, often cited as a philosophical guide for the Kremlin’s Eurasianist vision, has historically argued that China is a threat to Russia’s southern flank.

In his foundational text Foundations of Geopolitics, Dugin explicitly advocated for the “territorial disintegration, division, and political and administrative partition” of China.21 He warned that China’s “desperate thrust to the North” was inevitable and that Russia must seek alliances (potentially with Japan or even the West) to contain the Chinese geopolitical mass.22

Although Dugin has tempered his public rhetoric to align with the current “friendship,” the FSB leaks suggest that his underlying strategic logic—that a powerful, unified China is an existential threat to Russia—remains a dominant view within the Siloviki (security elite).23

Part IV: The Mechanics of the Deal – How Russia Wants the US to Help

4.1 The Transactional Nature of the “Reverse Kissinger”

If we accept the user’s premise that Russia fears Chinese expansion, the “Reverse Kissinger” strategy transforms from a US gambit into a mutually beneficial transaction. Russia does not necessarily want to become an American ally, but it desperately needs a lever to balance against Beijing.

4.1.1 The US as a Counterweight

For Putin, normalizing relations with the United States offers a path to reduce his vassalage to Xi Jinping.

• Diversification of Options: Currently, Russia has nowhere else to turn but China. This gives Beijing enormous leverage to dictate prices for Russian energy and demand access to sensitive technology. If the US lifts sanctions and reintegrates Russia into the European energy market (a tall order, but a theoretical goal), Russia regains bargaining power vis-à-vis China.⁶

• Security Guarantees: A deal with Trump could secure Russia’s western flank (freezing the Ukraine conflict), allowing the Russian military to pivot resources back to the vulnerable Far East to deter Chinese encroachment.⁷

4.1.2 Shrinking China’s Global Footprint

Russia benefits if the US successfully contains China’s global rise.

• The Arctic: China calls itself a “near-Arctic state” and seeks a role in Arctic governance, challenging Russia’s dominance there. The US and Russia share an interest in keeping the Arctic a “closed club” for Arctic nations only, excluding China.¹⁶

• Central Asia: China is displacing Russia as the primary power in Central Asia through the Belt and Road Initiative. While Russia cannot openly oppose this, it benefits if US pressure forces China to retrench and focus on its own coastal security, leaving Central Asia back in Moscow’s sphere.²⁶

4.2 Diplomatic Maneuvering in 2025

The diplomatic calendar of 2025 reflects this triangular dance.

• The Alaska Proposal: Reports indicate discussions of a summit between President Trump and President Putin in Alaska.²⁷ The location is symbolic—Alaska is former Russian territory sold to the US, a reminder of a peaceful transfer of land, contrasting with the “theft” of Outer Manchuria by China.

• Chinese Counter-Moves: Sensing the potential for a US-Russia realignment, Beijing has launched a diplomatic offensive. Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s visits to Moscow and his statements emphasizing the “rock solid” nature of the partnership are direct attempts to forestall any Russian pivot.²⁸

Part V: Analysis of the User’s Hypothesis – Verdict and Synthesis

The user’s hypothesis is complex, layering conspiracy theory with acute geopolitical insight. This report breaks down the verdict into its constituent parts.

5.1 “The Trump Family Hates America”

Verdict: Technically False, Functionally Nuanced.

The administration does not “hate” the nation-state in the sense of wishing for its physical destruction. However, it harbors a profound hostility toward the existing institutional order of the United States. The “retaliation” is real, but it is an internal purge aimed at the “Deep State.” The alignment with Russia is a symptom of this domestic war—Russia is the enemy of the American establishment, and therefore the friend of the anti-establishment President.

5.2 “They want to use Russia to retaliate against it”

Verdict: Confirmed in Strategic Effect.

By pursuing the “Reverse Kissinger” strategy, the administration is dismantling the Atlanticist security architecture (NATO, support for Ukraine) that has defined American power since 1945. Critics view this as “retaliation” against the traditional US foreign policy establishment. The administration views it as a necessary restructuring to face the true enemy: China.

5.3 “Russia would also like China to become a little bit smaller”

Verdict: Confirmed by Intelligence.

The FSB leaks and the geopolitical reality of the Russian Far East provide overwhelming evidence that Russia fears Chinese territorial encroachment. While Russia may not have the power to physically shrink China, it ardently desires a containment of Chinese power to prevent its own “economic annexation” and territorial loss.

5.4 “Russia may want the US to help with that”

Verdict: Confirmed as a Geopolitical Necessity.

Russia is trapped in an asymmetric partnership with China. A rapprochement with the United States is the only viable strategic option for Moscow to regain its autonomy. Putin needs the US to act as a balancing force; otherwise, Russia risks becoming a resource colony of the People’s Republic.

Part VI: Comparative Data and Strategic Indicators

The following data tables provide a structured analysis of the strategic asymmetries driving these dynamics.

Table 1: The Asymmetry of the “No Limits” Partnership (2025 Data)

Table 2: The "Reverse Kissinger" Scorecard – Feasibility Analysis

Part VII: Recommendations for Strategic Monitoring

To accurately assess the trajectory of the “Reverse Kissinger” strategy and the validity of the user’s “retaliation” hypothesis, observers should monitor the following critical indicators in the coming 12-24 months.

1. The “Haishenwai” Indicator: Monitor Chinese state media and academic output for references to “Outer Manchuria” or the use of Chinese names for Russian Far East cities. An uptick in this rhetoric would signal Beijing’s displeasure with Russian-US flirtation and validate FSB fears.¹⁸

2. The Arctic Council Dynamic: Watch for US-Russia voting blocks within the Arctic Council specifically aimed at denying observer status or rights to “non-Arctic states” (China). This would be the first concrete fruit of a US-Russia anti-China axis.²⁵

3. The “Domestic Retaliation” Index: Track the implementation of Schedule F and the prosecution of former intelligence officials. If the Trump administration explicitly links these purges to “exposing the Russia Hoax,” it confirms the synthesis of foreign policy realignment and domestic retribution.²

4. Russian Arms Sales: Monitor Russian military exports to India and Vietnam. Continued or increased sales of high-end systems (S-400, submarines) to China’s regional rivals would serve as definitive proof that Moscow is hedging against Beijing.⁶

In conclusion, the user’s query, while provocative, cuts to the heart of the most significant geopolitical realignment of the 21st century. The triangular tension between a retributive American presidency, a paranoid Russian state, and an expansionist Chinese empire is the defining engine of global conflict in 2025.

Works cited

1. From Victim to Avenger: Trump’s Performance of Strategic ... - MDPI, accessed December 20, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/2673-5172/6/3/134

2. Targeting of political opponents and civil society under the second Trump administration, accessed December 20, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Targeting_of_political_opponents_and_civil_society_under_the_second_Trump_administration

3. Trump’s First 100 Days: Creating an Imperial Presidency That Harms ..., accessed December 20, 2025, https://www.americanprogress.org/article/trumps-first-100-days-creating-an-imperial-presidency-that-harms-americans/

4. (U)REPORT SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE UNITED STATES SENATE, accessed December 20, 2025, https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/sites-default-files-documents-report-volume5.pdf

5. Senate panel finds Russia interfered in the 2016 U.S. election | PBS News, accessed December 20, 2025, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/senate-panel-finds-russia-interfered-in-the-2016-us-election

6. Criticism of the ‘Reverse Kissinger’ | Royal United Services Institute - RUSI, accessed December 20, 2025, https://my.rusi.org/resource/criticism-of-the-reverse-kissinger.html

7. Trump, Kissinger, and the myth of a new world order | Feature from King’s College London, accessed December 20, 2025, https://www.kcl.ac.uk/trump-kissinger-and-the-myth-of-a-new-world-order

8. Trump’s Abrupt Turn to Russia—and Whether a U.S.-Russia Team Could Gain Any Sway in South and Southeast Asia | Council on Foreign Relations, accessed December 20, 2025, https://www.cfr.org/article/trumps-abrupt-turn-russia-and-whether-us-russia-team-could-gain-any-sway-south-and

9. Putin and Kim Hate the West—and Mistrust Beijing - RAND, accessed December 20, 2025, https://www.rand.org/pubs/commentary/2025/04/putin-and-kim-hate-the-west-and-mistrust-beijing.html

10. Breaking down Trump’s 2025 National Security Strategy | Brookings, accessed December 20, 2025, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/breaking-down-trumps-2025-national-security-strategy/

11. The Myth of a ‘Reverse Kissinger’: Why Aligning With Russia to Counter China Is a Strategic Illusion - The Diplomat, accessed December 20, 2025, https://thediplomat.com/2025/02/the-myth-of-a-reverse-kissinger-why-aligning-with-russia-to-counter-china-is-a-strategic-illusion/

12. The Geopolitical Three-Body Problem: US-China-Russia Dynamics and the New Reverse Kissinger Strategy Involving Russia and North Korea - Project MUSE, accessed December 20, 2025, https://muse.jhu.edu/article/953090

13. To weaken China, Russia must be defeated in Ukraine, accessed December 20, 2025, https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/beltway-confidential/4074432/to-weaken-china-russia-must-be-defeated-in-ukraine/

14. Convergence and divergence: China-Russia relations in the age of Trump - New Eurasian Strategies Centre, accessed December 20, 2025, https://nestcentre.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/NEST-Centre-China-Russia-relations-in-the-age-of-Trump.pdf

15. China Has a ‘Stealth Playbook’ To Carve Up Russia - 19FortyFive, accessed December 20, 2025, https://www.19fortyfive.com/2025/12/china-has-a-stealth-playbook-to-carve-up-russia/

16. Secret Russian document shows suspicion of China - Pioneer Press - PageSuite, accessed December 20, 2025, https://edition.pagesuite.com/tribune/article_popover.aspx?guid=28cdf840-4566-4e75-b709-ace29c0e2969

17. A diminished Russia risks losing control of Far East territory as China and North Korea expand influence, accessed December 20, 2025, https://www.milwaukeeindependent.com/explainers/diminished-russia-risks-losing-control-far-east-territory-china-north-korea-expand-influence/

18. On national humiliation, don’t mention the Russians | MCLC Resource Center - U.OSU, accessed December 20, 2025, https://u.osu.edu/mclc/2023/03/29/on-national-humiliation-dont-mention-the-russians/

19. Russia’s age of contraction - Engelsberg Ideas, accessed December 20, 2025, https://engelsbergideas.com/essays/russias-age-of-contraction/

20. Putin Is Opening A Door For China - Noema Magazine, accessed December 20, 2025, https://www.noemamag.com/putins-revanchism-opens-a-door-in-the-far-east-for-china/

21. Aleksandr Dugin - Wikipedia, accessed December 20, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksandr_Dugin

22. Aleksandr Dugin’s Foundations of Geopolitics | FSI - The Europe Center, accessed December 20, 2025, https://tec.fsi.stanford.edu/docs/aleksandr-dugins-foundations-geopolitics

23. Scholar called ‘Putin’s brain’ attacked on Chinese internet - VOA, accessed December 20, 2025, https://www.voanews.com/a/scholar-called-putin-s-brain-attacked-on-chinese-internet/7615826.html

24. Why the Ukraine war works in China’s favour, accessed December 20, 2025, https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/why-ukraine-war-works-china-s-favour

25. Conflicts to Watch in 2026, accessed December 20, 2025, https://www.cfr.org/report/conflicts-watch-2026

26. Neighbors of Strategic Importance, accessed December 20, 2025, https://ridl.io/neighbors-of-strategic-importance/

27. Trump-Putin summit may ease recent tensions, but impact on Russia-Ukraine conflict remains uncertain: expert - Global Times, accessed December 20, 2025, https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202508/1340481.shtml

28. China, Russia Remain Close Despite Trump’s Efforts to Drive a Wedge, accessed December 20, 2025, https://www.asiapacific.ca/publication/china-russia-remain-close-despite-trumps-efforts-drive-wedge

29. Wang Yi and Sergei Lavrov Emphasize the Importance of Safeguarding the Outcomes of the Victory of World War II, accessed December 20, 2025, https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/wjbzhd/202512/t20251203_11765644.html

30. Putin’s negotiation strategy is predictable: move slowly, keep Trump interested, and reset expectations | Chatham House, accessed December 20, 2025, https://www.chathamhouse.org/2025/03/putins-negotiation-strategy-predictable-move-slowly-keep-trump-interested-and-reset

31. On National Humiliation, Don’t Mention the Russians - China Media Project, accessed December 20, 2025, https://chinamediaproject.org/2023/03/24/on-national-humiliation-dont-mention-the-russians/

GPT-5.2 analyses a 'Powers of Corruption' Diagram. If you want to go from “dark diagram” to proof-grade claims, you’d look for: Primary money trails, Procurement/ethics documentation,...

PASCAL HETZSCHOLDT

·

12:11

Read full story

The Russia-adjacent “connective tissue” points that are real, documentable, and potentially problematic if Trump Media (TMTG / Truth Social) is merging with TAE.

PASCAL HETZSCHOLDT

·

11:16

Read full story