Donald Trump's card in Venezuela: Invasion sets a dangerous precedent

American President Donald Trump’s attempt to assuage a Maga (Make America Great Again) base — made restless owing to a variety of factors, including coverups of the President’s involvement with sex offender Jeffrey Epstein — has resulted in a brazen economic project to invade oil-rich Venezuela and defend the petro-dollar global ecosystem. The Venezuelan action, including the capture of President Nicolas Maduro, violates the foundational agreements of the United Nations charter that the United States (US) signed in 1945; it rules that states must refrain from using military force against other countries and respect their sovereignty. To be sure, the US has rarely cared about conforming to international law when the situation did not suit the country, but unlike George Bush’s equally egregious invasion of Iraq in 2003, Operation Absolute Resolve did not have even the fig leaf of ideals or verifiable facts. In post-invasion statements, Mr Trump’s declaration that the US would run the country made no mention of defending democracy; he referred instead to Venezuela’s oil reserves — the world’s largest — and discussions with US oil companies on how best to exploit them. The administration’s claims that the US was seeking to crack down on Venezuelan drug cartels do not hold water since the country accounts for less than 1 per cent of drugs smuggled into the US. 

 

The US may well discover the limits of its ambitions. Having learnt salutary lessons from the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, it has chosen to rely on local resources rather than parachute in US personnel to run the country. But with President Nicolas Maduro languishing in a New York jail, the US’ chosen partner, acting President Delcy Rodriguez, has proven ambivalent, forcing Mr Trump to issue her a public warning to cooperate. The defence minister has strongly criticised US actions. And although the military is small compared to the US juggernaut, it does not appear to be showing signs of welcoming the US. US Big Oil, too, has proven cautious in accepting Mr Trump’s open invitation; 10 years of sanctions have crippled investment in Venezuela’s oil industry and the cost of extracting oil from tar sands is prohibitive and technically challenging.

 

With Europe pondering a coherent response, the global precedents that Mr Trump has set with this Venezuelan adventure are unambiguously dangerous. The White House has made little attempt to disguise its broader colonial ambitions. Colombia, Cuba, and Greenland all appear to be in its sights. This is of a piece with the articulation of its neo-Monroe doctrine some weeks ago. But unethical attacks on sovereign territory by the world’s most powerful democracy throw up in the air Ukraine-Russia peace talks and Israel’s continuing military belligerence in West Asia. Of no less consequence is the tacit carte blanche the Venezuelan invasion offers China  to pursue its long-standing expansionary ambitions in its neighbourhood, including its grand programme to integrate Taiwan. Though Caracas is far from New Delhi, the repercussions for India are no less threatening. India’s necessarily cautious response — with the trade deal hanging in the balance — does not fully reflect apprehensions of heightened Chinese territorial ambitions in the country’s (India’s) North and Northeast. History has shown that US meddling in Latin America has rarely ended well. This time too, the world could end up paying a high price.