India’s statement mentions neither the US nor international law, though that would have been the expectation from the BRICS baton holder 

Even by the exalted standards of the US military and its precision bombing raid on Iran’s nuclear facilities, the forced removal and transfer to the US of Nicolas Maduro, the sitting President of Venezuela, awed. But it also shocked.

This was not a regime change engineered by intelligence agencies but a violation of international law and respect for the sovereignty of nations, not to mention disregard for the US constitutional requirement of keeping Congress informed. Rightly, it raises serious concerns not only in the US’s hegemonic domain of the Americas but across the world.

Venezuelan involvement in the narcotics trade and President Maduro’s indictment in a US court on those counts is the stated reason for the action, which was billed by the Secretary of State as law enforcement, no matter US military boots on Venezuelan ground. But by all accounts, Venezuela is hardly the big narcotics player.

And the usual pretext, human rights violations and restoration of democracy, doesn’t appear to carry the day either. Indeed, President Trump said that the leader of the opposition, Maria Machado, who was recently conferred the Nobel Peace Prize, didn’t have much “respect and support” in Venezuela. And, on the ground, some kind of deal seems to be getting pushed with Delcy Rodriguez, who was President Maduro’s vice-president. All of this appears to be an oily deal with Venezuela.

The US is the largest oil producer in the world, but most of it is light crude. Its old refineries are used to processing heavy crude, the sources of which are Canada, Russia, and Venezuela. While currently there is no shortage of oil in the market, and it will take time to ramp up Venezuela’s now relatively small production of oil, the lure of its largest oil reserves in the world can hardly be overstated for President Trump, who thinks that climate change is a hoax and that the US needs even more fossil fuels than it has. Years of sanctions have degraded Venezuela’s oil infrastructure and could be an opportunity for the US to have it denationalised and back in control of the US oil companies, as was the case prior to Venezuela’s nationalisation of its oil assets in 1976. No doubt President Trump referred to it as “American oil” while stating that the US oil companies will move to invest large sums in Venezuela, adding as an afterthought, “making Venezuela great again”. No doubt, senior executives of oil companies were alerted by him before Congress. Of course, Venezuela has much more to offer with rich deposits of gold and coal too.

Other geographies with such resources better beware. Greenland has often been mentioned as a US need, and there is little that Denmark, its sovereign, can do if it happens, no matter its NATO membership. Iran, which is witnessing street protests, has recently been warned by President Trump that the US is “locked and loaded and ready to go”, likely with Israeli encouragement. Interestingly, while stating that Mexico and Colombia may have to be dealt with, he said that Cuba would fold by its own volition. Cuba isn’t oil-rich!

There are views that the action was to crimp the Chinese who were doing oil and other deals with Venezuela (indeed, a Chinese delegation was in Caracas and had met President Maduro on the day of the US action) and trying to find ways to undermine the US dollar in the oil trade. These issues certainly have merit but don’t appear to be the prime movers, though anything that hurts the dollar as king is totally unacceptable to President Trump. However, his referencing the 1823 Monroe Doctrine means recognising spheres of influence—music to Russian and Chinese ears. The Chinese mouthed strong words at the UNSC and may have lost an oil supplier, but will they pull out of the critical minerals deal with the US? Unlikely, given the indications of President Trump wanting to do a trade deal with them.

The action may also help rebuild support for President Trump among the Latin community in the US that had started wavering, following the ICE actions, and, of course, coalesce the MAGA base, which has been uncomfortable of late with issues of medical care costs and the Epstein files. And then there is the quest for legacy as the most consequential US president in recent times who has added hegemony and may add territory to the US.

Other than France, whose Foreign Minister noted a violation of the UN charter, reaction from Europe has been muted with calls for restoration of democracy in Venezuela. Ruffling President Trump’s feathers isn’t seen as in their interests, and they need to keep the trans-Atlantic partnership going, no matter the ‘new’ values and principles of the US. This is important for them for national security in general and the possible peace deal with Russia on Ukraine. Their hope—this too (Trump 2.0) shall pass.  

India’s statement mentions neither the US nor international law, though that would have been the expectation from the BRICS baton holder (Brazil and South Africa have been clearly critical). However, with a trade deal in the offing, being circumspect can be understood, as ties with the US are now predicated on presidential happiness.