Deck of Cards
If the world feels more uncertain in 2026 than, say, a decade ago, it’s because several slow-moving forces have reached visible tipping points at the same time.
Energy systems are being rewired, global trade is fragmenting, populations are ageing or surging unevenly, and geopolitical rivalry has returned to a real normal rather than the perceived normal of the past several decades.
These shifts are unsettling precisely because a single crisis or villain does not drive them. They are structural.
In moments like this, a basic understanding of geopolitics becomes useful. When you strip away the rhetoric of influential global personalities, you are left with two stubborn variables that refuse to go away, namely geography and demographics.
These certainly don’t explain everything, but they explain far more than we like to admit. They shape what is easy and what is expensive, what can be sustained and what eventually breaks down.
And history shows us something uncomfortable: the strongest nations are not necessarily dominant because they are more skilled, more disciplined, or more enlightened.
Many are powerful because they occupy favourable geography, enjoy demographic tailwinds, or were lucky enough to industrialise at the right moment. Skill matters, but structure matters first.
Understanding that difference is essential if we want to make sense of where the world is heading over the next decade.
Geography
Geography does not determine outcomes, but it sets boundaries around what is plausible. Mountains, oceans, rivers, climate zones, and distance from threats do not change quickly. Political systems do.
Some countries are born into geographic advantage.
They have navigable rivers that bind markets together, coastlines with deep natural harbours, fertile land that feeds large populations, and oceans that shield them from invasion. These countries can afford long planning horizons. They can make mistakes and recover.
Other countries are born into constraint. Flat land with few natural barriers invites invasion. Landlocked positions make trade dependent on neighbours. Harsh climates raise the cost of infrastructure and food security. For these countries, survival often consumes political attention. Strategy becomes reactive.
This is why geography matters most when systems are stressed.
In stable eras, global trade, finance, and alliances blur geographic disadvantages. In tense eras, geography reasserts itself. Supply chains shorten. Borders harden. Distance matters again.
Maritime access, control of chokepoints, and internal transport routes are once again strategic assets. So are mineral deposits, arable land, and reliable water sources.
Geography is therefore the terrain on which all ambition must operate.
Demographics
If geography defines the playing field, demographics determine how long you can stay in the game.
Population size alone is not decisive. What matters is age structure, health, skills, and participation.
A large, young workforce can fuel growth, innovation, and military capacity. An ageing population can still be wealthy and technologically advanced, but it faces more challenging trade-offs.
Demographics shape:
labour supply and productivity
tax revenue and welfare sustainability
military recruitment
migration pressures
political stability
The world today is splitting into two demographic camps.
One is ageing, shrinking, and increasingly reliant on productivity gains and migration. The other is young, growing, and struggling to convert numbers into opportunity.
This divergence will quietly reshape geopolitics over the next decade more than any single war or election.
Lessons From History
We tend to tell ourselves stories about national success that emphasise culture, leadership, or values. These things matter, but history suggests they work best when aligned with favourable structure.
Countries with secure borders, internal connectivity, and growing populations can invest patiently in institutions. Over time, this produces competence that looks earned, but is often scaffolded by structural ease.
Conversely, countries with exposed borders, demographic decline, or chronic insecurity are often forced into short-term thinking. They may appear erratic or aggressive, but those behaviours are frequently responses to constraint rather than preference.
Empires tend to overreach not because they forget how to govern, but because they attempt to project power beyond what geography and demographics can support. Distance stretches supply lines. Ageing populations limit replenishment. Eventually, something gives.
This pattern is unfolding again.
The United States: Structurally Advantaged, Strategically Strained
The United States of America remains the most structurally advantaged great power in the world.
Geographically, it is insulated by two oceans and bordered by relatively weak, friendly neighbours. It has vast navigable river systems, fertile land, abundant energy, and access to both the Atlantic and the Pacific trade routes.
No other major power enjoys this combination at scale.
Demographically, the United States is ageing, but more slowly than most developed peers. Its fertility rate is higher than that of much of Europe and East Asia, and it remains a magnet for skilled and unskilled migration. This replenishes its workforce and supports long-term growth, a feat many rivals struggle to match.
These advantages help explain why the United States can sustain global military reach, absorb economic shocks, and recover from internal political dysfunction. They do not mean it is immune to decline, but they raise the cost of betting against it.
Over the next decade, the US is likely to remain the world’s central power, but with a more selective approach to engagement. Expect:
continued investment in maritime dominance
industrial policy focused on semiconductors, energy, and defence
pressure on allies to shoulder more regional responsibility
internal political volatility that looks alarming but rarely translates into strategic paralysis
The key risk for the United States is not geography or demographics. It is whether domestic political polarisation undermines its ability to translate structural advantage into coherent long-term strategy.
China: Scale Meets Constraint
China is often described as a rising power, but its position is more complex.
Geographically, China faces genuine challenges.
It has a long coastline but is hemmed in by island chains controlled or influenced by rivals. Its western regions are vast but sparsely populated and difficult to secure. Many of its borders touch other major countries or unstable regions.
Demographically, China’s challenges are more severe.
Decades of low fertility have produced a rapidly ageing population and a shrinking workforce. This is not a future problem; it is already happening. Fewer workers must support more retirees, even as growth slows.
China’s extraordinary rise was enabled by a large, disciplined workforce, export access, and massive state-led investment. That model now faces diminishing returns. Productivity gains must replace labour growth, and domestic consumption must replace export dependence.
Over the next decade, China is likely to:
Focus inward on stability, technology self-reliance, and control
Prioritise regional influence over global dominance
Invest heavily in automation, AI, and industrial upgrading
Use economic leverage and infrastructure rather than military force where possible
China’s leadership understands its constraints, and that awareness may lead to caution rather than recklessness. The risk is not that China is collapsing, but that it becomes more assertive in defending what it sees as its shrinking window of opportunity.
Europe: Wealthy, Ageing, and Geopolitically Exposed
Europe is often discussed as though it is a single actor, but structurally it behaves more like a collection of medium-sized countries sharing a market and a regulatory system.
Geographically, Europe is densely packed, with short distances between capitals and limited natural barriers.
Historically, this produced frequent conflict. The post-war order suppressed those dynamics through institutions, US security guarantees, and economic integration.
Demographically, Europe is ageing faster than almost any other region.
Fertility rates are low, populations are stagnating or shrinking, and welfare systems are under strain. Migration helps, but also fuels political backlash.
Over the next decade, Europe faces a structural dilemma:
It has wealth, technology, and skilled labour.
It lacks scale in defence, energy autonomy, and demographics.
It is strategically exposed to instability on multiple fronts.
Europe is likely to respond by:
Increasing defence spending, but unevenly
Deepening industrial policy and strategic regulation
Relying more heavily on alliances
Becoming more selective in global engagement
Europe’s future influence will depend less on raw power and more on its ability to remain a stable, attractive economic and normative centre in a fragmented world.
Africa: Demographic Gravity and Geographic Opportunity
Africa is often framed in terms of crisis, but structurally it represents the most significant long-term shift in global demographics.
The continent is young, growing, and urbanising. Over the next two decades, most of the world’s labour-force growth will occur there. This is neither automatically a dividend nor a disaster. It is potential.
Geographically, Africa is diverse.
Some regions are resource-rich and well-connected to trade routes. Others are landlocked or climate-stressed. Infrastructure gaps remain significant, but they are narrowing in key corridors.
The central question for Africa over the next decade is not population size, but absorption. Can economies generate enough jobs, skills, and stability to harness demographic momentum?
Likely trends include:
Intensified competition for African resources and partnerships
Growing regional differentiation between successful hubs and fragile states
Increased strategic importance of African ports, minerals, and energy
Continued migration pressure toward Europe and the Gulf
Africa’s trajectory will matter enormously for global labour markets, supply chains, and geopolitical alignment. It will not be a single story, but many overlapping ones.
What The Next Decade Likely Looks Like
Between 2026 and 2036, expect less dramatic collapse and more persistent friction.
Supply chains will be redesigned around resilience, not efficiency.
Maritime chokepoints and critical minerals will remain strategic flashpoints.
Demographic divergence will quietly reshape power and migration.
Middle powers will gain bargaining room but face sharper alignment pressure.
Climate stress will act as a multiplier, not a primary driver.
The world is not returning to Cold War simplicity. It is moving toward a more complex, regionalised, negotiated order.
Final Takeaway
Geopolitics is often misunderstood because we look for intent where constraint is the real driver.
Geography limits what can be done cheaply. Demographics limit how long power can be sustained. Skill matters, but structure decides whether skill compounds or merely postpones decline.
The strongest nations are not always smarter. They are often better positioned. The most fragile are not always foolish. They are often constrained.
Until next time, remember that an understanding of that distinction does not make the world safer, but it does make it clearer. And clarity is the best strategic advantage of all.
Dion Le Roux
References
International Energy Agency (IEA). Global Critical Minerals Outlook 2024. Paris: IEA, 2024.— Authoritative analysis of mineral concentration risks, energy transition geopolitics, and supply-chain vulnerability.
International Monetary Fund (IMF). World Economic Outlook: Navigating Global Divergences. Washington, DC: IMF, 2024.— Covers demographic ageing, productivity constraints, fiscal pressures, and uneven growth trajectories.
International Monetary Fund (IMF). G20 Background Note: Ageing, Migration, and Fiscal Sustainability. Washington, DC: IMF, 2025.— Detailed treatment of ageing societies, labour shortages, and migration as a structural economic variable.
Kaplan, Robert D. The Revenge of Geography: What the Map Tells Us About Coming Conflicts and the Battle Against Fate. New York: Random House, 2012. Seminal modern work on how geography constrains and channels political and military power.
Mearsheimer, John J. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2014 (Updated Edition). Foundational realist framework explaining power competition, geography, and structural constraints.
National Intelligence Council (NIC). Global Trends 2040: A More Contested World. Washington, DC: Office of the Director of National Intelligence, 2021. Long-range strategic assessment of demographic, technological, and geopolitical forces.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Working Better with Age. Paris: OECD Publishing, 2019. Evidence-based analysis of ageing workforces and productivity implications in developed economies.
United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA), Population Division. World Population Prospects 2024: Summary of Results. New York: United Nations, 2024. Definitive global demographic projections and age-structure analysis.
United States Department of Defence (DoD). 2024 Department of Defence Arctic Strategy. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Defence, 2024. Illustrates the re-emergence of geography and distance as strategic military considerations.
World Bank. Africa’s Pulse: An Analysis of Issues Shaping Africa’s Economic Future. Washington, DC: World Bank, 2024/2025 editions. Comprehensive analysis of African demographics, labour markets, infrastructure, and growth constraints.
World Economic Forum (WEF). Global Risks Report 2025. Geneva: World Economic Forum, 2025. Explores climate, geopolitical fragmentation, supply-chain risk, and demographic stress as interconnected risks.
Zakaria, Fareed. The Post-American World. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2008 (Updated editions). Contextualises relative power shifts without assuming absolute decline of established powers.