Venezuela and the Return of Dictatorial Power Politics

Trump on January 6 -- public domain image

By D. Raja, General Secretary, Communist Party of India

The year 2026 has begun with a dangerous alarm for the future of the world, showing the blood-stained fangs of imperialism. The United States, under President Donald Trump, carried out a terrible attack on Venezuela, forcibly captured the incumbent President of Venezuela Nicolás Maduro and transferred him to the United States to face prosecution. This was not a covert operation against a non state actor nor a multilateral action sanctioned by international institutions. It was the abduction of a head of state of a sovereign country. That such an act could be openly defended by Washington, even as it drew sharp criticism inside the United Nations Security Council, speaks volumes about the erosion of norms that once governed international conduct of nations.

Almost simultaneously, Trump publicly claimed that Prime Minister Narendra Modi was keen to keep him happy and followed this with threats of new tariffs against India for continuing to import Russian oil. This use of tariffs as instruments of intimidation reinforces a broader pattern of coercion. Economic pressure, diplomatic arm twisting and open violations of sovereignty are being normalised. What is even more alarming is the silence or evasiveness of emerging powers, including India. This silence signals not strength or strategic autonomy but a profound failure of the present global order to uphold equality among nations and to reflect the reality of a multipolar world.

To grasp the gravity of this moment, one must return to the historical context in which the post war international system emerged. The defeat of Nazism and Hitler was not merely a military victory. It was a civilisational turning point. The enormous sacrifices made, particularly by the Soviet Red Army, saved humanity from fascist annihilation and created an opening to build a world order that would prevent such catastrophes from recurring. The United Nations system emerged from this resolve. Despite its structural flaws and power asymmetries, it rested on core principles of sovereign equality, non aggression and respect for self determination, especially for peoples emerging from colonial rule.

For decades, global authoritarianism and unilateral aggression were constrained by countervailing forces. The Soviet Union acted as a check on unchecked expansion by the United States and its allies. The Non Aligned Movement, led by newly independent nations such as India, Indonesia, Egypt and Yugoslavia asserted the political agency of the formerly colonised world. This combination of ideological competition and multilateral engagement imposed limits on imperial overreach. Even at moments of extreme tension, diplomacy and balance prevailed. The Cuban Missile Crisis remains a defining example of how restraint and negotiation averted global disaster.

History offers further illustrations. During the Bangladesh Liberation War of 1971, when the United States sought to intimidate India through threats of sanctions and the deployment of the Seventh Fleet, Soviet support proved decisive. That support not only safeguarded India’s sovereignty but also enabled the emergence of Bangladesh, giving concrete expression to the democratic aspirations of the Bengali speaking people who had suffered immense repression. Similarly, Vietnam’s resistance to the United States stands as a testament to the capacity of a determined people to defeat overwhelming military might. Despite carpet bombing, chemical warfare and immense destruction, Vietnam prevailed. These episodes were not accidents of history. They were products of a global balance that recognised the legitimacy of national liberation and the limits of power.

The roots of the current crisis lie in the abrupt end of that balance. The dissolution of the Soviet Union ushered in what was proclaimed as a unipolar world order. This moment was quickly harnessed to impose neoliberal economic orthodoxy across the globe. Under pressure from the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, many countries were compelled to dismantle public sectors, weaken labour protections and open their economies to speculative capital. The promise was growth and prosperity. The reality has been persistent unemployment, widening inequality, chronic debt and ecological devastation.

Neoliberalism has failed repeatedly to improve the living standards of the majority of the world’s population. It has concentrated wealth on an unprecedented scale while eroding democratic control over economic policy. Yet many major economies, including India, have continued to rely on this discredited framework. The domestic consequences are visible in joblessness, agrarian distress, hunger and shrinking social security. The global consequences are equally severe. Economic dependency breeds political vulnerability. When development is tied to foreign capital flows and foreign markets, foreign policy autonomy is compromised. Silence in the face of coercion becomes a survival tactic.

This dependency helps explain the muted response of several countries to the United States’ actions in Venezuela. The illegal capture of a head of state and the revival of doctrines that treat entire regions as exclusive spheres of influence should have provoked widespread condemnation. Instead, what emerged was hesitation. This is not merely a moral failure. It is a structural one. A global order dominated by neoliberal economics produces insecurity and fear, discouraging independent positions even when fundamental principles are violated.

The record of United States interventions over the past decades further underscores the hollowness of claims about defending democracy or global stability. Iraq was destroyed on fabricated pretexts. Afghanistan was occupied for two decades only to be abandoned in chaos. Syria was torn apart through proxy wars and sanctions that devastated civilian life. These interventions were illegal, catastrophic and futile. They brought neither peace nor democracy. They did, however, consolidate a precedent where power overrides law.

The episode in Venezuela marks a dangerous escalation. It signals that even the formal immunity of a head of state can be discarded when it suits the interests of the dominant power. Combined with economic bullying through tariffs and sanctions, this represents a frontal assault on the principle of sovereign equality. If left unchecked, it sets a precedent that no nation, regardless of size or status, can consider itself secure.

The response cannot be cosmetic. What is required is a comprehensive overhaul of both domestic and international frameworks. At the global level, institutions must be restructured to reflect contemporary realities. The United Nations Security Council, frozen in the geopolitics of 1945, no longer represents the world as it exists. Permanent membership must be expanded to include emerging nations and meaningful representation from India, Africa and Latin America. Without such reforms, the Council will remain paralysed or complicit in the face of unilateral aggression.

Equally vital is the strengthening of South South cooperation. Developing economies must forge solidarities that reduce dependence on dominant powers. Cooperation in trade, technology, energy and finance can provide alternatives to coercive arrangements. A genuine commitment to a rules based global order requires not rhetorical endorsement but collective action to defend international law.

At the national level, countries like India must rethink economic and foreign policy choices. Strategic autonomy cannot coexist with economic subservience. Protecting livelihoods, strengthening public sectors and pursuing inclusive development are not inward looking policies. They are prerequisites for independent diplomacy. A nation struggling with unemployment and inequality at home cannot project confidence abroad.

The crisis we are witnessing is not inevitable. It is the outcome of choices made over decades. It can be reversed through political will, international solidarity and a renewed commitment to justice and equality. The alternative is grim. A world governed by coercion, abductions and tariff threats is a world sliding towards chaos. History teaches us that such orders do not endure. They collapse under the weight of their own contradictions, often leaving immense human suffering in their wake.

The choice before humanity is stark. Either the world reclaims the principles of sovereignty, self determination and collective security or it submits to a lawless order where power alone decides right and wrong. Silence in the face of injustice is not neutrality. It is complicity. For nations that once led the struggle against colonialism and domination, breaking that silence is not optional. It is a historical responsibility.