Bluff, break, block, boast: Inside superpowers’ global playbook 

In the great geopolitical arena, power is neverdeclared outright. It is performed, signaled, masked and maneuvered. Like the master tacticians, nations do not simply react to threats, nor do they just chase opportunities. They play games – each according to cultural identity, strategic worldview and global objectives – to gain geopolitical leverage.

Earlier this year, during a meeting with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, President Donald Trump reportedly asked, “What cards are you holding?” It wasn’t just a metaphor, it pointed directly to the central premise of global politics: Who holds the leverage? Soon, Trump returned with a tariff board, posing the same question for all the world leaders.

He plays his hand just as any American would in a game of poker.

The art of the bluff

The United States doesn’t always play with the best cards, but it plays the table. US foreign policy very much resembles a high-stakes game of poker, a game of leverage, bluff and psychological dominance.

Poker’s fatal flaw is overconfidence. America sometimes bets big – Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya – only to lose credibility. Its internal polarization, debt burden and declining manufacturing base could undermine its bluffing in the next decade.

Russia plays chess

If geopolitics were a chess game, Russia would be the patient player sitting with eyes fixed on a dozen successive moves ahead. Russia’s geopolitical approach evokes classical maneuvers of chess.

From Syria to Crimea, Moscow postures rather than merely acting. Its actions are calculating, cold and destructive. It aims for control of the center, applies precision strategy to pressure its opponent,and isn’t scared to break the board if it can’t win cleanly. To establish strategic buffers, it employs energy leverage, hard power and regional destabilization.

Every action, whether in the Arctic, Africa or Ukraine, is strategic, purposeful and based on the idea that perception, sacrifice and time are all weapons. The Russian military presence in Ukraine, Syria andArmenia as well as across parts of Africa demonstrates a belief that disruption can yield leverage.

But the modern world is significantly more unpredictable than chess, which favors perfect anticipation. Russia’s long-term flexibility may be impacted by structural issues including one-man rule, a lack of innovation, and demographic pressures. The conflict in Ukraine has a clear geopolitical justification, but it cannot be sustained economically over time.

China plays wéiqí (Go)

China’s foreign policy often mirrors the strategy used in the ancient board game Go. In Go, players don’t attack directly. Instead, they place stones strategically across the board to encircle territory and limit their opponent’s options. While Russia seeks decisive capture, Beijing thinks in encirclements.

China plays the long game, placing stones that quietly claim space and restrict the movement of others. Its Belt and Road Initiative is less about trade routes, more about blocking alternatives.

China doesn’t need to control everything; it just needs to limit your choices. Its assertiveness in the South China Sea, its grip on supply chains, its growing influence in international institutions, AI breakthroughs ( Deepseek) – these are all methods of quiet but relentless containment.

China’s rise is often mischaracterized as either imminent domination or cautious integration. But Beijing is neither a reckless aggressor nor a satisfied stakeholder. Instead, it operates as a cautious revisionist power – seeking not to overturn the global order outright but to subtly reshape the world in its favor.

Through the Belt and Road Initiative, Shanghai Cooperation Organization, technological self-sufficiency efforts and selective engagement in global institutions, China is building tracks parallel to the US-led order. This strategy emphasizes asymmetric competition through technology advancements, infrastructural diplomacy and economic leverage. This is hegemony pursued by stealth and size, not through tanks and aircraft carriers.

Go is a game not of brute strength but of subtle positioning and patience. But China may be running short on both. Its accelerating demographic decline, centralized authoritarianism, rapid demographic decline, ideological rigidity and absence of institutional feedback loops could undermine future adaptability. While China will remain a formidable regional power, its global ambitions may stall.

India plays kabaddi

India’s foreign policy style can be likened to kabaddi, a high-contact, agile and strategic sport. In kabaddi, players boldly raid opponents’ territory, chanting “kabaddi, kabaddi” as both a tactic and a display of confidence. This boastful, high-risk move signals dominance but for success requires quick thinking, strategic execution and a timely retreat.

India has shown a tendency to boast in recent times. Under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, this approach has been marked by a desire to project India as a Vishwaguru, a moral and intellectual leader to the world.

The idea of a world guru is a reflection of this mindset, projecting the belief that India has emerged as a global superpower, a bold vision but one that’s unmatched by the necessary diplomatic leverage, economic strength or decisive action. Recent tariff wars provide a sobering reality check, revealing India’s vulnerability and limited ability to negotiate or respond decisively in a timely manner, compared with China or Russia.

India’s attempt to balance relations with both the US and Russia over Ukraine has backfired. In trying to sit on the fence, India has ended up isolating itself by paying the highest tariffs. In essence, India has miscalculated. It lacks strategic leverage, fails to take timely stands and refuses to become a client state. In this triangle of inaction, it becomes its own worst enemy.

India chalked up a $45.8 billion goods-trade surplus with the US in 2024 and Washington has left no stone unturned to exert pressure and humiliate India.

However, for Delhi now to shift toward Beijing poses its own risks as India faces a roughly $100 billion trade deficit with China, raising concerns about how China might leverage this imbalance in the long run.

In the absence of real leverage, symbolic diplomacy only feeds Beijing’s strategic calculus that Delhi can be managed, not matched. India risks being seen and treated as a swing state with no swing. More importantly, India’s premature warmth toward China is perilous.

If this is considered a foreign policy success, then India’s potential as a global power remains a topic of debate. India is at a strategic crossroads. It has to exert its presence in the world through substance rather than spectacle. Otherwise, India risks remaining perpetually caught between the devil and the deep blue sea.

It cannot afford to project power without building it from within. To avoid undermining itself, India must align ambition with capacity through economic reforms, strategic clarity and timely execution in order to shape its own bloc in future.

As we enter an era of profound geopolitical uncertainty, success will depend less on force and more on adaptability, resilience, and technological leadership.

The next two decade will likely be shaped by a multipolar world, with power shared among competing nations. The future will depend on how well countries adapt their strategies to shifting global conditions.