Tragedy and farce: On the U.S. and Venezuela

Context & The Gist

The article discusses the escalating intervention by the U.S. in Venezuela, specifically referencing the apprehension and exile of President Nicolás Maduro. It frames these actions as a continuation of historical U.S. imperialism, echoing past interventions like the Iraq War, and a violation of international law, particularly Article 2 of the UN Charter.

The central argument is that the U.S. is motivated by a desire to reassert hegemony in Latin America (reviving the Monroe Doctrine), sever ties between Latin America and China, and gain control over Venezuela’s substantial oil reserves. The author contends that this intervention, despite claims of promoting democracy, risks destabilizing the region and validating fears of colonial exploitation.

Key Arguments & Nuances

• Historical Parallelism: The article draws parallels between the current situation in Venezuela and past U.S. interventions (Iraq, North Africa), highlighting a recurring pattern of flawed justifications and destabilizing consequences.
• Violation of International Law: The U.S. actions – including naval blockades, “interdictions” of oil tankers, and alleged killings of civilians – are presented as clear breaches of international law and disregard for the UN Security Council.
• Motivations Beyond Democracy: The author argues that the stated goal of “exporting democracy” is a pretext, with the real drivers being geopolitical strategy (Monroe Doctrine, countering China) and economic interests (oil reserves).
• Pyrrhic Victory: Even if the U.S. succeeds in removing Maduro, the article suggests that the United Socialist Party of Venezuela retains significant support, and a forcibly installed regime may face resistance and validate popular fears of exploitation.
• Hypocrisy: The article points out the hypocrisy of the U.S. justifying Maduro’s removal based on alleged drug trafficking while simultaneously releasing convicted narcotics traffickers and supporting controversial leaders in other countries.

UPSC Syllabus Relevance

• GS Paper II: International Relations – U.S. Foreign Policy, Latin American Politics, International Law & Organizations (UN Charter).
• GS Paper II: Governance – Issues relating to the development and management of Social Sector/Services relating to Health, Education, and Human Resources. (Impact of political instability on social welfare).
• GS Paper III: Economy – Effects of liberalisation on the economy, changes in industrial policy and their effects on industrial growth. (Impact of sanctions and trade wars).

Prelims Data Bank

• Monroe Doctrine (1823): A U.S. foreign policy asserting that any intervention in the political affairs of the Americas by European powers would be viewed as a hostile act toward the United States.
• Article 2 of the UN Charter: Sovereign equality of all its Members.
• Cartel de los Soles: A Venezuelan criminal organization allegedly linked to high-ranking officials in the Venezuelan government, designated as a foreign terrorist organization by the U.S.
• Venezuela’s Oil Reserves: Venezuela possesses the world’s largest proven oil reserves, estimated at around 303.8 billion barrels (as of 2023).

Mains Critical Analysis

The U.S. intervention in Venezuela presents a complex interplay of geopolitical, economic, and ideological factors. A PESTLE analysis reveals the following:

• Political: The intervention is driven by a desire to reshape the political landscape of Latin America, countering perceived threats to U.S. hegemony and promoting a pro-Washington regime.
• Economic: Control over Venezuela’s oil reserves is a significant economic incentive, offering potential benefits to U.S. businesses and energy security.
• Social: The intervention risks exacerbating existing social divisions within Venezuela, potentially leading to further instability and humanitarian crises.
• Technological: While not a primary driver, technological capabilities (surveillance, military hardware) enable the U.S. to exert pressure and conduct operations in the region.
• Legal: The intervention raises serious questions about the legality of U.S. actions under international law, particularly regarding sovereignty and non-interference.
• Environmental: Increased oil extraction and potential conflict could have negative environmental consequences for Venezuela and the surrounding region.

A critical gap lies in the lack of a comprehensive strategy for post-intervention stabilization. Simply removing Maduro without addressing the underlying socio-economic grievances that fueled his support base could lead to a power vacuum and prolonged instability. The U.S.’s history of intervention in Latin America suggests a pattern of prioritizing short-term strategic gains over long-term regional stability.

Value Addition

• Juan Guaidó: In 2019, the U.S. recognized Juan Guaidó as the interim President of Venezuela, challenging Maduro’s legitimacy. This move was widely criticized internationally as interference in Venezuela’s internal affairs.
• The Helms-Burton Act (1996): This U.S. law imposes sanctions on foreign companies that “traffic” in property confiscated by the Cuban government after the 1959 revolution. It serves as a precedent for the use of extraterritorial sanctions against Venezuela.
• Non-Interference Principle: A cornerstone of international law, the principle of non-interference prohibits states from intervening in the internal affairs of other states.

Context & Linkages

This earlier article, published in December 2025, foreshadowed the escalating tensions between the U.S. and Venezuela, specifically detailing the seizure of the Venezuelan oil tanker Skipper. It highlights the U.S.’s attempts to disrupt Venezuela’s economic ties with Cuba and engineer regime change, setting the stage for the more direct intervention described in the current article. The continuity lies in the consistent pattern of U.S. actions aimed at undermining Maduro’s government.

The December 2025 article warned of escalating military pressure from the U.S., including deployments of naval forces and accusations against Maduro of drug trafficking. This article provides context for the current situation by demonstrating the gradual escalation of U.S. involvement, culminating in the apprehension of Maduro. Both articles emphasize the lack of credible evidence supporting the U.S.’s claims and the potential for further instability.

The Way Forward

• Diplomatic Engagement: Prioritize dialogue and negotiation with all stakeholders, including the Maduro government, opposition groups, and regional actors.
• Respect for International Law: Adhere to the principles of sovereignty and non-interference, avoiding unilateral actions that violate international norms.
• Humanitarian Assistance: Provide humanitarian aid to address the needs of the Venezuelan population, regardless of political considerations.
• Regional Cooperation: Encourage regional organizations (e.g., CELAC, OAS) to play a constructive role in mediating the crisis and promoting a peaceful resolution.
• Address Root Causes: Focus on addressing the underlying socio-economic grievances that contribute to instability in Venezuela, such as inequality and corruption.