Claims of a swift US military operation in Venezuela, followed by regime change and a scramble for oil, have triggered intense debate about American power, energy geopolitics, and the future of the global order. Whether viewed as a hypothetical scenario, a strategic signal, or a narrative crafted for political ends, the episode raises deeper questions about military dominance, fossil fuel politics, and the erosion of a rules-based international system.
Military supremacy as strategic messaging
The United States spends close to a trillion dollars annually on defence, a scale unmatched by any other power. Its military doctrine increasingly emphasises speed, precision, and technological dominance — cyber warfare, satellite control, electronic suppression, and network-centric operations. In the claimed Venezuela operation, technology rather than troop strength was projected as the decisive factor: disabling radar, communications, and power infrastructure to paralyse resistance.
Such narratives underline a broader message: modern wars, especially against weaker adversaries, are intended to be short, overwhelming, and politically decisive. They also function as demonstrations aimed at rivals and allies alike.
China, Pakistan and the credibility of air defence systems
The episode has also been used to question the effectiveness of Chinese-origin air defence systems deployed abroad. Comparisons have been drawn with India’s reported success against Pakistani defences during Operation Sindoor, reinforcing doubts about the battlefield credibility of Chinese military exports.
Whether or not such comparisons are technically sound, perception matters in arms markets and strategic alignments, potentially influencing defence procurement decisions across the Global South.
Domestic politics and the use of force
Foreign military action has often intersected with domestic political cycles in the US. Presidents from George H. W. Bush to George W. Bush witnessed surges in approval ratings after decisive military action. For Donald Trump, whose approval ratings have remained polarised, assertive external action can be framed as leadership and resolve ahead of elections to the US Congress.
With all 435 House seats and 35 Senate seats contested, control over foreign policy narratives can translate into electoral leverage, especially when linked to energy prices and economic sentiment.
Oil beneath the rhetoric
Beyond security arguments, energy remains central. Venezuela possesses the world’s largest proven oil reserves — over 300 billion barrels — largely in the Orinoco Belt. Yet production has collapsed due to sanctions, mismanagement, and infrastructure decay. The heavy nature of Venezuelan crude makes extraction expensive and environmentally damaging, emitting more greenhouse gases per barrel than lighter crudes.
Any attempt to rapidly scale production would require tens of billions of dollars and years of sustained investment. Studies by firms like Energy Aspects suggest that even adding half a million barrels per day could cost around $10 billion and take two years, while restoring peak production would demand investments approaching $100 billion over a decade.
Climate contradictions in a warming world
Expanding heavy oil production runs counter to global climate goals. Lower oil prices, driven by increased supply, can stimulate higher consumption, slowing the transition to renewables. In a world already struggling to meet climate targets, renewed emphasis on carbon-intensive oil raises fundamental questions about the sincerity of energy transition commitments by major powers.
Implications for India’s energy interests
India once imported up to 400,000 barrels per day of Venezuelan crude and was a major processor of heavy oil. Sanctions imposed in 2020 forced a halt, directly affecting ONGC Videsh Limited, which operated the San Cristobal field. Venezuela reportedly owes OVL close to $1 billion in unpaid dues.
Any restructuring of Venezuela’s oil sector under US dominance would likely prioritise American firms, limiting space for Indian re-entry. This underscores India’s vulnerability to geopolitics in securing energy assets abroad and highlights the need for diversification and strategic autonomy.
The Monroe Doctrine revived
Explicit references to the Monroe Doctrine — the idea that the Western Hemisphere lies within America’s exclusive sphere of influence — signal a return to 19th-century geopolitical thinking. Such assertions unsettle not only Venezuela but also countries like Colombia and Cuba, and even US allies elsewhere, by normalising unilateral intervention.
The wider consequence is the weakening of international norms around sovereignty and non-intervention, especially when force is justified through selective legal or moral arguments.
A fraying rules-based order
When power replaces rules as the primary currency of international relations, uncertainty spreads. From Latin America to West Asia, states are forced to hedge, militarise, or seek alternative alliances. The risk is not just regional instability, but a global environment where coercion becomes acceptable statecraft.
What to note for Prelims?
- Monroe Doctrine and its contemporary interpretations
- Venezuela’s position in global oil reserves
- Role of sanctions in shaping energy geopolitics
- Environmental impact of heavy crude oil
What to note for Mains?
- Analyse how military power is used as a tool of geopolitical signalling
- Discuss the link between energy security and foreign intervention
- Examine the implications of reviving sphere-of-influence doctrines for global order
- Assess how geopolitical instability affects India’s overseas energy investments
