Nicolás Maduro came to power on the back of a rigged election. Shady and despotic, he never inspired confidence in the international community about his ability to run Venezuela in a civil and democratic manner. In the normal course, no tears should have been shed for him. However, the manner in which he has been deposed from the seat of power in Caracas has evoked condemnation and worry. The US is back to its old game of regime change, which has had disastrous consequences in the past. The operation offered a stark illustration of how raw power is now applied in practice, how sovereignty is increasingly conditional and how New Delhi is positioned within a harsher and more transactional international system.
Even by Donald Trump’s standards, the US move in Venezuela has set a new low in world order. The military operation to kidnap Maduro from his home may have been stunningly successful in achieving its ambition and generating new levels of hyperbole from Trump. However, even in a world that has grown accustomed to his cavalier attitude towards international law, the move’s blatant disregard for its strictures has stunned political leaders and commentators. While it had become obvious that a clear majority of Venezuelans wanted Maduro to go, the assumption that forcefully overthrowing the current government will lead to a smooth transition to democracy is dangerous, to say the least. It happened in Iraq when George Bush Jr deposed Saddam Hussein, only to usher in an era of insurgency and the birth of the Islamic State. But the former US President did so after building a semblance of consensus on this course of action with his Western allies. That wasn’t the case with Trump.
Look at the reactions the world over. British PM Keir Starmer has shed no tears about the end of Maduro’s regime but has distanced the UK from the operation. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, while saying that Maduro had ‘led his country into ruin’, also added that relations between countries must follow the principles of international law and warned that political instability in Venezuela could worsen. The United Nations was much blunter, with a spokesman for Secretary-General António Guterres saying he was “deeply alarmed by the recent escalation in Venezuela, culminating with today’s US military action in the country, which has potential worrying implications for the region.” The statement goes on to say: “Independently of the situation in Venezuela, these developments constitute a dangerous precedent. The secretary-general continues to emphasise the importance of full respect – by all – of international law, including the UN Charter.”
Some countries, India included, have been meek in speaking out about the US action. Unlike the outright condemnation by its BRICS partners, India has merely ‘expressed concern’ over the developments. It did not name the US, nor the violation of international law, but blandly asked ‘all concerned’ to address issues through dialogue. Our government should ponder: What’s to stop other countries now mounting military operations to kidnap the leaders of rival countries and proclaim that they are now running them?
Trump’s claim that the US will now ‘run’ Venezuela is of a piece with his earlier actions and characteristic braggadocio. The realities of what happens next in the oil-rich South American country will be largely determined by the complexities of power in Venezuela and the implications of the American move for other countries in the region, including Colombia and Cuba. But it could well be the last straw for multilateralism.
For Trump, more than narco-terrorism and the transnational criminal network that Maduro was allegedly running, Venezuela may have been about oil. The South American country has the world’s largest oil reserves, but has not been able to tap them. Trump wants American oil companies to start drilling operations there. But that is easier said than done. Remember, Trump has once even spoken of tapping oil reserves in Pakistan!
India was once among the largest buyers of Venezuelan heavy crude, importing over 400,000 barrels per day at its peak. These flows came to a halt in 2020, after sweeping US sanctions made purchases risky and logistically unviable. ONGC Videsh Ltd (OVL), jointly operates the San Cristobal oilfield in eastern Venezuela, output from which has fallen sharply due to US restrictions. Venezuela has failed to clear dividend payments owed to OVL. About $1 billion owed to India has been written off.
More than this loss, India should be worried about the ominous signals emerging from
the events in Caracas. Diplomatic silence is not the answer to developments that call for
condemnation.