With US warplanes striking Caracas and President Nicolás Maduro captured and taken for prosecution, Washington has crossed a new geopolitical Rubicon in hemispheric politics.
Salman Rafi Sheikh
Why the regime change
The real drivers behind the US intervention go far beyond the rhetoric of counter-narco operations and democracy promotion; they are rooted in an emerging Cold War 2.0 struggle for energy and influence. Venezuela sits atop the world’s largest proven oil reserves — estimated at roughly 303 billion barrels, dwarfing even Saudi Arabia’s holdings — making it a prize of immense strategic value in a world still powered by hydrocarbons. Under President Maduro, Caracas pivoted away from Washington and toward Beijing, entering deep oil-for-loans arrangements that saw Chinese credit — estimated in the tens of billions — repaid in crude rather than dollars, bolstering a non-US energy payment system that undercuts American financial primacy. In geopolitical terms, this linkage gave China a foothold in the energy market of the Western Hemisphere and straight upended decades of US dominance in its own strategic backyard — a shift that hardliners in Washington clearly now view as intolerable.
By seizing a foreign president, bypassing the United Nations, and signaling that sovereignty can be violated at will, the U.S. is sending a stark message: power now trumps principle
But it’s not just about oil and finance. Cuba, one of the region’s most enduring US antagonists, has been kept afloat in large part by subsidized Venezuelan crude for decades. Even as shipments have dwindled under sustained US pressure, Havana’s economy, already beset by crippling shortages and frequent blackouts, remains heavily dependent on Venezuelan fuel for electricity generation, transport, and basic services. The threat that this oil lifeline could be severed — whether by military action, sanctions, or blockade — is not an abstract fear but a direct economic and political pressure point that amplifies the regional fallout of the US escalation.
Regional Fallout
Rather than isolating the Venezuelan crisis, the US assault has poured gasoline on an already volatile geopolitical landscape. Across Latin America, governments from Brazil to Mexico have blasted Washington’s move as a violation of sovereign equality and a dangerous precedent that could undermine decades of regional diplomacy. Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva denounced the strikes as crossing an “unacceptable line” and called for action at the United Nations, framing the intervention as a broader threat to Latin American autonomy. Mexico’s left-wing government echoed this condemnation, rejecting military force and emphasizing that only diplomatic channels “preserve regional peace.” Colombia, which shares a long and porous border with Venezuela, has mobilized forces in fear of a humanitarian and refugee crisis even as it called for urgent de-escalation and international legal adherence. These reactions underscore a growing antipathy toward US unilateralism — not just from ideological allies of Caracas, but from states that have traditionally balanced autonomy with strategic cooperation with Washington.
What makes this backlash consequential is not isolated rhetoric; rather, it feeds into a wider realignment of global power blocs. Russia and China, both sharply critical of the US operation, have long invested economically and politically in Latin America, deepening ties through energy, infrastructure, and strategic partnerships that challenge US hegemony.
Beyond the hemisphere, Tehran and other US adversaries have likewise condemned the operation as a violation of sovereignty, underscoring that US military assertiveness may inadvertently strengthen the very alliances it seeks to weaken. The broader Global South — already wary of Western military interventions — may now see even greater incentives to hedge their positions or pivot toward alternative centers of power, from BRICS cooperation to multipolar economic partnerships. In this sense, the Venezuelan operation risks catalyzing a long-term erosion of US influence far beyond Caracas, inviting not submission but strategic counterweights.
The danger does not stop in the Western Hemisphere. By normalizing the overthrow and prosecution of a sitting head of state through unilateral force, Washington risks establishing a template that extends well beyond Venezuela, most ominously toward Iran. President Trump’s renewed threats of military action against Tehran are no longer rhetorical outliers; they now sit atop a demonstrated willingness to bypass international institutions, dismiss sovereignty claims, and pursue coercive regime change outright. For US adversaries and non-aligned states alike, the lesson is stark: if Venezuela can be invaded, no country protected only by international law is truly safe. Rather than deterring Iran, the Venezuelan operation may accelerate Tehran’s resolve to harden defenses, deepen ties with Russia and China, and insulate itself from US pressure — precisely the opposite of Washington’s stated goals. What emerges is not restored American authority, but a world increasingly convinced that restraint, diplomacy, and legal norms have been replaced by raw power as US policy tools.
The question of American leadership
By seizing a foreign president, bypassing the United Nations, and signaling that sovereignty can be violated at will, the U.S. is sending a stark message: power now trumps principle. Allies in Europe and Asia — from NATO partners to Japan and South Korea — are now forced to question whether US guarantees on trade, security, or nuclear deterrence are reliable or whether they are contingent on Washington’s immediate strategic interests.
Meanwhile, adversaries and non-aligned states are already exploiting this perception of unpredictability. Russia has emphasized multilateral institutions as the only counterweight to American unilateralism, while China is deepening economic and energy ties across the world to circumvent traditional US zones of influence. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization and BRICS bloc, long positioned as alternatives to Western-led frameworks, gain new legitimacy in the eyes of countries seeking security guarantees outside the American orbit. In short, what may look like decisive –and successful—action in Caracas risks accelerating a multipolar world in which US leadership is increasingly contested, credibility is diminished, and international partnerships are increasingly transactional rather than principled.
Salman Rafi Sheikh, research analyst of international relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs
No comments:
Post a Comment