Support us by contributing to StratNewsGlobal on the following UPI ID
ultramodern@hdfcbank
Strategic affairs is our game, South Asia and beyond our playground. Put together by an experienced team led by Nitin A. Gokhale. Our focus is on strategic affairs, foreign policy and international relations, with higher quality reportage, analysis and commentary with new tie-ups across the South Asian region.
You can support our endeavours. Visit us at www.stratnewsglobal.com and follow us on YouTube, Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.
र 500 per month
र 1000 per month
र 5000 per year
र 10000 per year
Donate an amount of your choice
र 500 per month
Donate र 500 per month
र 1000 per month
Donate र 1000 per month
र 5000 per year
Donate र 5,000 per year
र 10000 per year
Donate र 10,000 per year
Donate an amount of your choice
Donate an amount of your choice
U.S. Operation to Capture Maduro Faces Scrutiny at United Nations
The legality of the United States’ capture of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro will come under international scrutiny when the United Nations Security Council convenes on Monday. Despite growing criticism from some countries, Washington is expected to avoid strong condemnation from its key allies over the weekend military operation in Venezuela.
U.N. Security Council to Debate Legality
U.S. Special Forces seized Maduro on Saturday during a raid that reportedly caused power outages in parts of Caracas and struck military facilities. Venezuelan officials said the operation resulted in several deaths. Maduro is now being held in New York, awaiting a court hearing on drug trafficking charges.
Russia, China and other allies of Venezuela have accused Washington of breaching international law. However, Western nations that previously opposed Maduro have been more restrained, avoiding direct criticism of the U.S.
“Judging by the reactions from European leaders so far, I suspect that U.S. allies will equivocate exquisitely in the Security Council,” said Richard Gowan, director of global issues and institutions at the International Crisis Group.
U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres considers the U.S. raid to set “a dangerous precedent,” his spokesperson said on Saturday. Many legal experts share that view, arguing that Washington violated international law. Still, any attempt to censure the U.S. at the U.N. will likely fail, as it can veto resolutions against itself.
Washington Cites Self-Defence
European governments have generally called for adherence to international law without directly criticising the U.S. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot, however, stated that Washington breached “the principle of not resorting to force that underpins international law.”
The U.N. Charter obliges member states to avoid using force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any nation. Yet, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz defended the operation, invoking Article 51 of the Charter, which allows self-defence in response to an armed attack.
“In this case, you have a drug kingpin, an illegitimate leader indicted in the United States, coordinating with China, Russia, Iran, and terrorist groups like Hezbollah, pumping drugs, thugs, and weapons into our country,” Waltz told Fox News.
Legal scholars reject that justification. They argue the action lacked Security Council authorisation, Venezuelan consent, and the conditions for self-defence.
“The operation violated international law,” said Tom Dannenbaum, a professor at Stanford Law School. “Even if Maduro’s regime is illegitimate, that does not eliminate the need for a legal basis to use military force.”
U.S. Veto Prevents Accountability
Although the U.N. Security Council is responsible for maintaining global peace and security, the U.S. holds a permanent seat with veto power, allowing it to block any motion against itself.
Maduro was indicted in 2020 on charges including narco-terrorism conspiracy, which he has consistently denied.
“Even if Maduro were involved in drug smuggling, that would not constitute an armed attack permitting self-defence,” said Milena Sterio, professor at Cleveland State University College of Law. She added that Washington “cannot exercise extra-territorial jurisdiction to arrest individuals anywhere it pleases.”
Adil Haque, a professor at Rutgers Law School, also described the capture as “an illegal infringement of the inviolability and immunity of a sitting Head of State, who may lack democratic legitimacy but was clearly performing his official duties.”
with inputs from Reuters
Chinese Cyberattacks On Taiwan Infra Rose To 2.6 Mln Per Day In 2025
Chinese cyberattacks on Taiwan’s key infrastructure, from hospitals to banks, rose 6% in 2025 from the previous year to an average of 2.63 million attacks a day, the island’s National Security Bureau said, adding some were synchronised with military drills in “hybrid threats” to paralyse the island.
Taiwan has in recent years complained about what it sees as China’s “hybrid warfare” – from daily military drills near the island to disinformation campaigns and cyberattacks – as Beijing ramps up military and political pressure on the democratically governed island to force Taipei to accept its claims of sovereignty.
Jump In Attacks
The average number of daily attacks in 2025 jumped 113% from 2023, when the bureau first began publishing such data, with sectors such as energy, emergency rescue and hospitals seeing the sharpest year‑on‑year increases, according to a report by the National Security Bureau on Sunday.
“Such a trend indicates a deliberate attempt by China to compromise Taiwan’s crucial infrastructure comprehensively and to disrupt or paralyse Taiwanese government and social functions,” the report said.
The bureau said China’s “cyber army” timed operations to coincide with military and political coercion. For example, China launched 40 “joint combat readiness patrols” by sending military planes and ships close to Taiwan, and cyberattacks escalated on 23 of those occasions.
China also ramped up hacking activities during politically sensitive moments, such as when President Lai Ching-te marked his first year in office with a speech in May and when Vice President Hsiao Bi-khim spoke at a meeting with lawmakers at the European Parliament in November.
“China’s moves align with its strategic need to employ hybrid threats against Taiwan during both peacetime and wartime,” the report said.
China’s Taiwan Affairs Office did not respond to a request for comment.
China Denies Involvement
China routinely denies being involved in hacking attacks.
Beijing claims Taiwan as its own territory and has not ruled out the use of force to bring the island under its control. Taipei strongly objects to China’s sovereignty claims and says only Taiwan’s people can decide their future.
The Taiwanese report said the Chinese attacks included distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks designed to disrupt Taiwan’s daily life as well as man-in-the-middle attacks to steal information and penetrate the island’s telecommunications networks.
Science parks that anchor Taiwan’s semiconductor industry—home to firms such as TSMC 2330.TW—have also been prime targets, with attackers employing a range of techniques to steal advanced technologies.
The move was “an attempt to support China’s self-reliance in technology and economic development and prevent China from being put in a disadvantaged position in the U.S.-China technology competition,” the report said.
(with inputs from Reuters)
North Korea: Kim Jong Un Oversees Hypersonic Missile Test
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un oversaw the test firing of hypersonic missiles on Sunday, state media KCNA reported, as he cited the need for Pyongyang to maintain a powerful nuclear deterrent in its first ballistic missile test of the year.
“It’s a very important strategy to maintain or expand the strong and reliable nuclear deterrent,” Kim was quoted as saying in the KCNA report published on Monday, noting it was necessary because of “the recent geopolitical crisis and various international circumstances.”
The North Korean leader did not specify what crisis he was referring to, but some analysts said it may be linked to the U.S. strikes on Venezuela.
The missiles hit targets about 1,000 km (621 miles) away, over the sea east of North Korea, KCNA said.
The South Korean military said on Sunday that North Korea fired ballistic missiles towards the sea to its east as South Korean President Lee Jae Myung started a state visit to China, Pyongyang’s chief ally.
The missile tests were followed by a North Korean statement on Sunday that denounced the U.S. strikes on Venezuela as a violation of that country’s sovereignty.
Harder To Intercept Missiles
Hypersonic missiles typically launch a warhead that travels at more than five times the speed of sound or about 6,200 kmh (3,850 mph), often manoeuvring at relatively low altitudes.
Despite their name, analysts say the main feature of hypersonic weapons is not speed, which can sometimes be matched or exceeded by traditional ballistic missile warheads, but manoeuvrability.
North Korea last test-fired hypersonic missiles in October 2025, which analysts assumed were unveiled at a military parade along with a long-range intercontinental missile.
North Korean expert Hong Min, at the Korea Institute for National Unification in Seoul, wrote in a note on Monday that the latest missile tests were apparently a response to U.S. strikes on Venezuela, citing Kim’s comment, “recent geopolitical crisis.”
The missiles appeared to be the Hwasong-11, which were showcased at the October parade, Hong said, citing his analysis of images published in state media.
Hong said Pyongyang was seeking to emphasise its ability to launch such missiles at any time, something that could make it harder for U.S.-South Korean missile defence systems to preemptively intercept them.
Nuclear Goals
Perfecting hypersonic missile technology is one of North Korea’s five nuclear-arms development goals announced at a party meeting in 2021, said a former South Korean vice defence minister who is now a senior research fellow at the Sejong Institute.
Shin Beom-chul said North Korea also wanted to highlight to the leaders of South Korea and China, who are due to hold summit talks on Monday, that they should not discuss denuclearising North Korea.
North Korean media also recently showcased images showing what it said were Pyongyang’s efforts to build nuclear-powered submarines, Shin noted.
“Kim wants to tell the international community that his nuclear power is complete” at the upcoming 9th congress of the ruling party, he said.
The congress is expected to take place this month, analysts say.
(with inputs from Reuters)
Trump Threatens More Strikes If Venezuela Doesn’t ‘Cooperate’
After removing Venezuela President Nicolas Maduro from power, the Trump administration is gambling that it can intimidate his inner circle into toeing the U.S. line with threats of further military action that could put them at risk of a similar fate, according to sources familiar with the matter.
The United States would consider another military operation in Venezuela if the interim government in the South American nation did not cooperate, President Donald Trump said on Sunday.
Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One, travelling from Florida to Washington, that more military intervention was on the table. “If they don’t behave, we will do a second strike,” he said.
Asked if this would mean that U.S. troops would be deployed on the ground to conduct peacekeeping, Trump said it would depend on the actions of the government now led by Interim President Delcy Rodriguez.
Trump’s advisers also believe they may be able to work behind the scenes with Rodriguez, who, despite her public defiance, is seen as a technocrat who might be amenable to working with the U.S. on a political transition and key oil-related issues, according to three people briefed on the U.S. strategy.
Trump said he wants Rodriguez to give the U.S. and private companies “total access” to Venezuela’s beleaguered oil infrastructure, as well as roads and bridges that are in disrepair.
Strong Response
If she and the interim government do not cooperate, Trump told reporters they could face a strong response.
“I just say that she will face a situation probably worse than Maduro,” he said, adding that the deposed president “gave up immediately.”
Uncertainty about the Trump administration’s use of military force is raising questions about his ability to bend the post-Maduro Venezuelan government to his will.
The potential sweeteners for Maduro’s aides would be offers of amnesty or safe exile of the sort that Maduro rejected in his final days before his capture by U.S. special forces on Saturday, according to one source. He is now locked away in a New York detention centre awaiting a Monday court appearance on drug charges.
Venezuelan Defence Minister Vladimir Padrino and Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello, two powerful members of Maduro’s inner circle who both have multimillion-dollar U.S. bounties on their heads, remain potential spoilers in any such arrangement with the U.S., given their authority over the country’s military and intelligence apparatus.
Trump’s effort could also be undercut if Democrats can convince enough of the president’s fellow Republicans to restrict funding for further Venezuela military operations.
The U.S. president’s vow on Saturday to “run” post-Maduro Venezuela appears for now to be more an aspiration to exert outside control – or at least heavy influence – over the OPEC nation without deploying U.S. ground forces, which would have little public support at home.
But U.S. officials believe they can still gain cooperation from Venezuelan authorities by maintaining a massive military buildup off the country’s coast and keeping alive the threat of further air strikes, the targeting of Maduro loyalists and, as a last resort, sending in a contingent of U.S. troops.
“This is the sword that Trump has hanging over them,” the source told Reuters.
Venezuela’s remaining leaders could feel especially vulnerable because of the damage inflicted by U.S. air strikes on the country’s air defence systems, according to a second source familiar with the matter.
Another major source of leverage, hammered home by Rubio on Sunday television news programs, is to keep in place a “quarantine” on Venezuelan oil shipments, the government’s main financial lifeline.
Officials Defiant
Top Venezuelan officials, who have called the capture of Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores a kidnapping and accused the U.S. of trying to steal the country’s vast oil reserves, insisted that they remain united.
Rodriguez – who also serves as oil minister – has taken over as interim leader with the blessing of Venezuela’s top court, though she has said Maduro remains president.
Because of her connections with the private sector and her deep knowledge of oil, the country’s top source of revenue, Rodriguez has long been considered the most pragmatic member of what was Maduro’s inner circle, but she has publicly contradicted Trump on his claims that she is willing to work with the United States.
Brushing aside Rodriguez’ defiant language, Rubio told CBS: “We’re going to make an assessment on the basis of what they do, not what they say publicly.”
Trump said nothing about restoring democracy to Venezuela in his triumphant press conference on Saturday. And he disappointed the country’s opposition when he dismissed the idea of working with opposition leader and Nobel Peace Prize winner Maria Corina Machado, widely seen as Maduro’s most credible opponent, and focused more on prospects for exploiting Venezuela’s energy resources.
‘Overseeing Venezuela’
Trump’s aides appear to see co-opting Venezuela’s current leadership as the best way to stabilise the country and create a path for U.S. oil investment while moving toward some kind of political transition away from the Maduro government.
The U.S. has not intervened in Latin America so directly since invading Panama 37 years ago to depose military leader Manuel Noriega over allegations that he led a drug-running operation. The United States has levelled similar charges against Maduro, accusing him of running a “narco-state” and rigging the 2024 election, accusations he has denied.
Trump offered no clear picture of how the U.S. would fulfil his vow to oversee Venezuela, something critics quickly condemned as neocolonialism and which would risk alienating some supporters who oppose foreign interventions.
Much of the U.S. State Department’s Western Hemisphere office was caught by surprise by Trump’s remarks, and no preparations have been made for sending staff to Caracas, two U.S. officials said.
(with inputs from Reuters)
The Venezuela Crackdown: Making Trump’s Finances Great Again?
“Where is America going”, asked a senior former diplomat taking stock of Trump’s high profile “capture” (some would say kidnap) of the Venezuelan president and his publicly declared plans for its future.
“We’re going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition,” Trump said at a briefing at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.
“But this is reminiscent of what colonial powers used to do,” said the former diplomat, pointing to the “cutting up nations, societies, killing or deposing local rulers as they willed, is this what the 21st century is going to be about,” he wondered.
What about India? The statement from the External Affairs Ministry made it clear Delhi was not going to stick its neck out for Maduro.
It said “Recent developments in Venezuela are a matter of deep concern. We are closely monitoring the evolving situation. We call upon all concerned to address issues peacefully through dialogue, ensuring peace and stability of the region.”
As another diplomat pointed out, if India criticised Trump “he might turn on us and God knows what he could do.”
Trump’s motivations are no secret, he wants to make money and Venezuela is about that.
“We’re going to have our very large United States oil companies, the biggest anywhere in the world, go in, spend billions of dollars, fix the badly broken infrastructure, the oil infrastructure, and start making money for the country. ”
US oil companies have not commented on Trump’s plans but American refineries were originally built to process Venezuela’s heavy, sticky sludgy oil to produce diesel, asphalt and other fuels. The sense is they have been sounded out and are willing.
They would make money but so would Trump, money for himself, his family, his business not to mention his friends. And Maduro’s friends and neighbours in the region have largely kept quiet.
Those like the Colombian President Gustavo Pedro, who described the US operation as an “assault on sovereignty”, have already received a broadside from Trump in the crudest terms: “He’s making cocaine and they’re sending it into the United States, so he does have to watch his a**.”
Shock And Awe On Weibo, Unease In Beijing Over US Maduro Strike
The capture or kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro by U.S. forces was at the top of Weibo’s trending list, becoming one of the most discussed topics on the platform.
The intensity of the reaction reflected two concerns: China buys more than 70% of Venezuela’s oil accounting for 95% of that country’s revenue. Caracas also owes China $10 billion but has been tardy in payments, forcing Beijing to cut back on further investments.
The other concern is about the risks of underestimating U.S. power or resolve. Venezuela has serious implications when it comes to China’s plans for Taiwan and China’s own security.
Many netizens wondered if Beijing should “learn from the United States” when it comes to dealing with Taiwan. Others went further, describing the U.S. raid as a possible model for a future Chinese military operation against Taiwan.
But the presiding image for netizens was how powerful and decisive the U.S. looked. The idea that American forces could carry out a rapid night-time operation inside another country and capture a sitting president has shocked users.
Some questioned whether such an operation could be stopped if Washington chose to act elsewhere. This fear revealed genuine unease beneath the online bravado.
China’s official response reflected this sense of alarm. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs said it was “deeply shocked” by what it called the U.S. use of force against a sovereign state.
Neil Thomas, who researches and studies Chinese politics at the Asia Society, pointed out on X that the phrase “deeply shocked” (深表震惊) is extremely rare in Chinese official statements. He says Beijing normally reserves this wording for assassinations, terrorism, or major mass-casualty events.
The US military strikes on Venezuela and extraction of Maduro seem to have stunned China, especially if you compare it to Beijing’s reaction to last July’s Iran strike.
MOFA today says Beijing is “deeply shocked” (深表震惊), which per a quick search is a very rare term used only… pic.twitter.com/1ZhtQstgec
— Neil Thomas 牛犇 (@neilthomas123) January 3, 2026
He noted that China accused the U.S. of not only of breaking international law, but of threatening peace and security across Latin America and the Caribbean. He contrasted this with Beijing’s much milder response to last year’s U.S. strike on Iran, which used standard condemnation language and avoided broader claims about sovereignty or regional stability.
Why China Is Truly Alarmed
For China, Maduro’s removal cuts the ground from under a carefully crafted plan to ensure energy security. China has built up its profile in Venezuela over many years and Maduro’s adversarial relationship with the US helped.
Worrying for Beijing would have been comments on Weibo praising the U.S. action and expressing hope that similar power could one day be used against China’s own leadership.
Although these posts were quickly censored, their brief appearance highlighted how unsettling the news was for China’s tightly controlled online space.
What alarms Beijing is the precedent: a fast, targeted U.S. military operation removing a sitting leader without warning. This feeds into long-standing fears of Western-backed regime change.
Could China do the same in Taiwan? The more jingoistic among Weibo users would like to believe so, but the recent US arms package for the island, at over $11 billion, signals Washington’s commitment. No spoken words were needed.
Beijing’s immediate instinct will be to tighten control over online discussion and use the incident to portray the U.S. as reckless and dangerous. But somewhere it knows that its grand plans for taking over Taiwan would need to be revisited.
Venezuela Was About Oil, Next US Target Could Be Critical Minerals-Rich State?
Since the US capture (or kidnap) of Venezuela’s head of state (not the first time, recall Manuel Noriega of Panama in 1989), Latin America has reason to wonder if it presages Washington’s renewed involvement in the continent, overthrowing or destabilising existing governments not for ideological reasons, but something tangible: natural resources. And if it’s oil today it could be critical minerals tomorrow.
Dr Paola Andrea Baroni of Universidad Siglo 21, one of the top universities in Cardoba, Argentina, told StratNewsGlobal that “Maduro’s kidnapping and arrest delivers a severe setback to the Chavista regime without guaranteeing its collapse.”
The distinction is important. A weakened state does not automatically become a governable or compliant one, especially in a country where political power is deeply embedded in security institutions.
“It reinserts Latin America, long viewed as the US’s backyard, onto Washington’s geopolitical radar, spotlighting oil resources as a core driver,” she warns, with “pragmatic realism not ideology driving policy.”
Venezuela’s oil is not merely an economic asset; it is leverage in a global system increasingly defined by energy insecurity and rivalry with China.
Resource-rich states of South America such as Brazil, Colombia and Chile have been critical of the US action, because they know that if the intervention becomes standard for acquiring strategic assets, then this will apply to any resource-rich country.
But Baroni’s warning of instability is well taken: how will Venezuela (or any other South American nation similarly taken over) will be governed, who will represent the country while negotiating with Washington, and how society will respond, suggests that resource control through force may generate instability rather than predictable access.
That unease is echoed in Cuba. Havana described the US operation as a criminal act and a grave violation of international law, framing it as part of a long-standing campaign to reassert U.S. dominance in the hemisphere.
Cuba links the intervention to Venezuela’s natural wealth and warns that the move is intended to intimidate the entire region. The reference to the Monroe Doctrine is not symbolic nostalgia but a claim that resource control is once again being enforced through military means.
Delhi-based Livia Rodríguez, Chief Correspondent of Prensa Latina, has no doubt that Washington seeks “to replace the Venezuelan regime with a puppet regime that will allow the United States and large corporations to steal the oil and all the resources of the South American country.”
She suspects that “Venezuela is the first piece in a broader plan against all of Latin America,” regardless of ideological orientation. In a world racing to secure lithium, rare earths, and other critical minerals essential for energy transitions and military technologies, Latin America’s resource base becomes a strategic prize. Oil remains central, but it is no longer the only driver.
Cuba’s statement reinforces this regional reading. By invoking the Proclamation of Latin America and the Caribbean as a Zone of Peace, Havana frames the intervention as an attack not just on Venezuela but on a collective regional commitment.
Rodríguez also challenges the assumption that such operations succeed politically. Despite the shock of the attack, she believes that “the people are in the streets, but demanding the return of their constitutional president.”
This suggests that interventions designed to secure resources may provoke resistance that complicates governance and disrupts extraction rather than stabilizing it.
The operation in Venezuela cannot be separated from the global rush for energy and critical minerals. Whether this approach strengthens U.S. influence or accelerates regional fragmentation remains unclear. But in an era where oil and minerals shape power, sovereignty itself may become negotiable.
‘Hard Choices, Not Hope, Mark India’s Options In 2026’
India’s foreign and strategic policy in 2026 will be shaped less by optimism than by hard choices, according to Nitin Gokhale, Editor-in-Chief of StratNews Global, who outlined a sobering landscape of challenges during a wide-ranging interview.
At the core, Gokhale argues, lies China. Despite episodic diplomatic engagement and partial de-escalation along the Line of Actual Control, Beijing remains India’s principal long-term competitor. China’s military build-up, economic leverage, and willingness to undercut India in multilateral forums leave little room for complacency. Pakistan, he adds, is best understood as a derivative of this larger China challenge—sustained politically, economically, and militarily by Beijing.
Managing this pressure, Gokhale stresses, ultimately depends on India’s economic trajectory. Sustained growth of around 7 per cent annually is not just a development goal but a strategic necessity, underpinning military capability and diplomatic influence alike.
Alongside China, India’s relationship with the United States presents its own contradictions. While political ties have grown strained—particularly after New Delhi refused to endorse former President Donald Trump’s claims of mediating India–Pakistan tensions—working-level cooperation remains robust. Military-to-military engagement, defence co-development, technology access, and trade negotiations continue largely unhindered. Yet Gokhale warns that a trust deficit at the political level may prove difficult to repair quickly.
Russia completes what he describes as a complex strategic triangle. India has resisted Western pressure to downgrade ties with Moscow, particularly over energy purchases, arguing that its relationship with Russia is autonomous and historically rooted. At the same time, New Delhi watches uneasily as Moscow grows more dependent on Beijing, raising questions about Russia’s role in any future India–China crisis.
These great-power dynamics inevitably spill into India’s neighbourhood. From Bangladesh and Nepal to Sri Lanka and the Maldives, smaller states increasingly hedge by playing China, the US, and India against one another. Gokhale notes that this is not unique to South Asia, arguing that no major power today enjoys uncontested influence in its backyard.
India’s response, he suggests, has been calibrated patience—avoiding overreaction, waiting out political transitions, and positioning itself as a reliable, long-term partner.
Looking ahead, Gokhale highlights three imperatives: keeping the economy strong, accelerating indigenous capabilities in emerging technologies such as AI and quantum systems, and building a military ready for a potential two-front challenge. Equally critical, he adds, is internal security, with new forms of radicalisation and “white-collar terrorism” emerging as underappreciated risks.
For India in 2026, the task is not choosing sides, but sustaining balance in an increasingly unforgiving world.
US Capture Of Maduro Is Actually About Controlling Venezuela’s Oil?
The photograph on X showed Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro, hands behind his back, in the custody of two men from the Drug Enforcement Agency. It appears to confirm President Donald Trump’s claim that Maduro and his wife are in the custody of US law enforcement.
Add to that, a media report from Caracas quoting Venezuela’s Vice President Delcy Rodriguez saying “We do not know the whereabouts of President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores, we demand proof of life.”
For now, at least one Maduro ally has vowed to fight on.
“We will not negotiate, we will not surrender, and we will ultimately triumph,” Defence Minister Vladimir Padrino said, framing the events not as the end of the Maduro government, but as the beginning of a broader confrontation.
Former Indian diplomat R Swaminathan believes that “This is not going to open up the space for the Nobel Peace prize winner María Corina Machado,” he said, referring to speculation about an opposition takeover. “Before that happens, the US will have to carry out major operations to remove thousands of generals and followers of Maduro.”
Prof Aparjita Pandey of Jawaharlal Nehru University believes that military pressure may actually reinforce the existing power structure. Rather than weakening Maduro’s camp, it could consolidate it and accelerate an internal succession managed by the armed forces.
Why Maduro?
In other words, Trump has Maduro but his loyalists in Caracas may ensure their regime continues and nothing changes. That would be bad news for Trump who is evidently hoping that with Maduro in custody, he can now control Venezuela’s oil, the world’s largest proven reserves.
So all of Trump’s talk of Maduro heading a drug cartel and trafficking into the US may have some truth to it, but the real reason is oil. For over two decades, Venezuela has operated outside the realm of US policy on oil.
That was an irritant. Why? Because easy access to Venezuelan heavy crude would reduce US exposure to the ongoing uncertainties in West Asia and soften the economic risks of a future confrontation with Iran. In simple terms, it would make escalation elsewhere cheaper and easier to absorb.
Control over oil flows still translates into influence over pricing and currency use, and by extension, the durability of the dollar’s role in global energy markets. That is why the South American nation has never been treated as a purely regional issue.
More Questions
China’s special envoy Qiu Xiaoqi, was in Caracas just hours before the US launched its grab Maduro operation. His presence signals how important Venezuela is to China as an energy supplier. Any forced political change in Caracas would inevitably push Beijing out of a strategic energy relationship it has invested heavily in.
Moscow condemned the attack as “armed aggression” and warned that ideological hostility had replaced pragmatic diplomacy. It reiterated that Latin America had declared itself a zone of peace, and called for the issue to be taken to the UN Security Council.
Neither China nor Russia may fight for Maduro. But both clearly see Venezuela as a test case, one that could set precedents for how far the US is willing to go when strategic resources are involved.
Quagmire Risk?
At this point it’s not clear if US forces remain in Venezuela. But can it afford to get drawn into a long drawn out crisis? It would drain attention and resources and limit America’s ability to project power elsewhere. It would also complicate Israeli planning in the Middle East, which depends heavily on US leverage and credibility.
What happens next in Venezuela will not remain contained within Latin America. If the US succeeds, it will reinforce the idea that force and economic pressure can still be used to reshape sovereign states in strategically valuable regions.
If it does not, it may expose the limits of American power at a moment when rivals are increasingly willing to test those limits. Either outcome will be watched closely, not just in Caracas, but in Tehran, Beijing, Moscow, India and beyond.
As Trump And Tehran Raise The Heat, War Clouds Gather
Are the mass protests in Iran coming to a head? India’s former ambassador to Iran, Gaddam Dharmendra, believes that these protests are different from the mass anti-government demonstrations of 2022 and earlier. If not dealt with urgently, these have the potential to pose a more serious systemic challenge.
“For the 1st time, the bazaaris, an influential merchant class, have shut their shops and come out in protest. This is due to the crash of the Iranian currency, the Rial, which in turn is due to a combination of US economic sanctions and long-standing economic mismanagement. The current protests have brought together whole segments of society, including students, seniors, pensioners, etc, onto the streets,” he told StratNewsGlobal.
A Newsweek report quoting senior academic Alex Vatanka of the Middle East Institute echoes a similar line.
“The point is this regime has mishandled the economy, the society, and he foreign policy. It’s mishandled so badly for so long that you have created this desperation among people for change, particularly younger people who don’t see any hope.”
But Dharmendra does not believe the Pezeshkian Government is in imminent danger of falling.
“It has been 40 years since the Islamic Revolution. The system is deeply embedded, and Iran’s institutional frameworks are strong. The people do receive health, educational and social welfare facilities, whatever their shortcomings. I don’t think the system is going to collapse as it has in Syria or Iraq. It’s much more durable.”
Yet the sabre-rattling is getting louder and worse. In the last 24 hours, Iran’s ambassador to the UN shot off an angry letter to Secretary-General Guterres, urging him to condemn “unlawful threats” directed at his country by President Trump.
Recall that the latter had warned Tehran against cracking down on the demonstrations, saying he was “locked and loaded”, meaning ready to strike Iran. The US is not short of military assets in the region.
Its Fifth Fleet comprising aircraft carriers is headquartered in Bahrain, in Qatar is the Al Udeid Airbase, the biggest in the region with every kind of combat aircraft and bombers, two bases in Iraq house more than 2000 US troops, several bases in Kuwait including one that handles logistics delivery and the Al Dhafra Airbase in the UAE where F-22 jets and MQ-9 drones are stationed.
But Indian diplomats who monitor the region and the protests closely warn that while Iran has been debilitated by sanctions, it still retains the ability to hit back. It can mine the Strait of Hormuz through which 20% of the world’s supply of oil transits. Those mines can also bottle up the US Navy and limit its movement.
The larger danger, diplomats say, is that any blockade in the supply of oil could see prices shoot up. If the blockade escalates into war, it could engulf the entire region as Iran is certain to encourage its proxies, Hamas and Hezbollah, to strike at US interests.
Any war will threaten the livelihoods of the estimated 15 to 20 million-strong Indian diaspora, besides disrupting the flow of energy. Remember, India imports 35% of its energy from the Persian Gulf region.
For now, Iran’s moderate President Masood Pezeshkian has chosen a conciliatory line, admitted faults and promised to make things right. But sanctions have severely weakened the regime’s ability to help its own people. The currency has fallen steeply in value, and prices of everyday items are going beyond the common man’s reach.
Pezeshkian is doing the best he can, but he cannot take on the clerical establishment and its militant backers, the Revolutionary Guards and the Quds Force. Forty-seven years since the founding of the Islamic Republic, the regime remains well entrenched and is going nowhere.