The analysis of contemporary geopolitical conflict requires a conceptual framework capable of grasping strategies that operate not by contesting established truths, but by dissolving the very foundations of truth itself. The 'Minimisation Plan', a theorized multi-decade Sino-Russian grand strategy, cannot be fully understood through conventional models of statecraft, which are predicated on hierarchical power and a clear distinction between truth and falsehood. A more potent, if unconventional, lens is offered by the philosophy of Gilles Deleuze, whose work provides a systematic deconstruction of the foundational assumptions of Western metaphysics [1, 2]. By examining the core conflict between the Western "arborescent" model of reality and the operationalized Deleuzian "rhizomatic" doctrine, it becomes possible to map the ideological battlefield upon which this new form of warfare is waged.
The Western liberal order is fundamentally "arborescent" or "tree-like" in its conception of reality, knowledge, and power. This model, which Deleuze identifies as the central pillar of Western metaphysical thought since Plato, is defined by a central root—a single origin, a transcendent and unified truth—from which a trunk and a series of hierarchical, bifurcating branches logically extend [3, 4]. This structure inherently privileges unity over multiplicity, identity over difference, and the original over the copy [5]. Geopolitically, the post-Cold War "unipolar order" represents a quintessential arborescent structure, predicated on a single origin of political and economic legitimacy—Washington D.C.—and a set of hierarchical institutions (G7, World Bank, UN) that branch out from this central hegemonic authority. This worldview's greatest strength—its commitment to a singular, verifiable, "rules-based" order—is also its greatest vulnerability, as it presupposes a shared reality where truth can be ascertained.
In direct opposition, the Minimisation Plan operates according to a "rhizomatic" logic, a concept developed by Deleuze and Félix Guattari [6]. A rhizome is a subterranean, non-hierarchical network where any point can connect to any other without a central root [6, 7]. It is the conceptual blueprint for the multi-domain grand strategy of the Sino-Russian alliance, which does not seek to grow a competing tree, but to de-center, bypass, and ultimately dissolve the coherence of the established arborescent order itself. The philosophical engine of this doctrine is Deleuze's "reversal of Platonism," a radical denial of a unified origin in favor of a world composed of simulacra [8, 9]. A simulacrum is a copy for which there is no original; its power lies not in its veracity, but in its ability to function as a self-validating reality that produces real-world effects. The strategic objective is to introduce a multiplicity of potent simulacra into the information ecosystem, shattering the very notion of a single, authoritative narrative.
The timeline for the availability of these concepts as a potential operational doctrine is critical. Deleuze's foundational works, Difference and Repetition (1968), Anti-Oedipus (1972), and A Thousand Plateaus (1980), were mature and widely available in the West for at least a decade before the Minimisation Plan's alleged initiation around 2001 [1, 2]. Major works were translated into Russian and Chinese throughout the 1990s and 2000s, making them accessible to state strategists engaged in long-term planning.
To analyze the Minimisation Plan, a specific set of analytical tools is required to deconstruct its deceptive narratives and identify its strategic signatures. These models are drawn directly from the internal document "A Framework for the Judgment of Ideas."
Before any idea can be mapped, it must be thoroughly interrogated from multiple perspectives to pierce its surface-level presentation. This requires asking a minimum of 10-20 critical questions across four fundamental viewpoints:
The Psochic Hegemony (or Moral Compass) is a model for mapping any action or idea onto a two-dimensional plane to reveal its true moral and volitional character. As explained in "A Framework for the Judgment of Ideas," it is a map of consciousness that allows an analyst to feel the nature of an idea by plotting it on two axes:
This law posits that actors with a small, selfish worldview are incapable of conceiving of motivations outside their own limited perspective. Understanding that their own goals are extractive, their only available tactic is to accuse their opposition of the precise actions they themselves are undertaking.
A recurring pattern for deception is the Satan Path, where the road to hell is paved with good intentions. It follows three stages:
The plan's most effective defense mechanism is its own perceived implausibility. As detailed in the internal document "The Unbelievable Truth," an individual's reaction to a paradigm-shifting idea is a "precise printout of the current state of your own worldview." The Minimisation Plan leverages this by being so audacious that it is reflexively dismissed as a "conspiracy theory." This exploits the "Logical Conclusion of Disbelief": if one insists that nothing can be 100% true, their worldview is inherently vulnerable to ambiguity and cannot mount a defense against a well-framed lie. The constant barrage of high-intensity distractions ensures no one has the cognitive bandwidth to connect the dots and overcome this initial disbelief.