Donald Trump's administration has dramatically escalated its involvement in Venezuela, a move analysts are labelling a stark return to the United States' long history of interventionist foreign policy, often described as 'naked imperialism'.
A Recognisable Pattern of Intervention
The policy, initiated in 2019, saw the US government throw its full weight behind opposition figure Juan Guaidó, recognising him as the legitimate interim president of Venezuela over the elected leader, Nicolás Maduro. This decisive action went far beyond diplomatic censure, incorporating severe economic sanctions designed to cripple the Venezuelan state's oil industry and broader economy.
This approach is not a novel invention but a clear echo of tactics employed throughout the 20th century. The US has a long record of intervening in Latin American affairs, from orchestrating coups to imposing crippling embargoes, to protect its economic interests and geopolitical influence. Trump's Venezuela strategy, with its regime-change objective and economic warfare, fits seamlessly into this established pattern.
Sanctions and Suffering
The human cost of this policy has been severe. While aimed at pressuring the Maduro government, the broad sanctions have exacerbated a profound humanitarian crisis within Venezuela. Shortages of food, medicine, and essential supplies have deepened, leading to increased migration and suffering for ordinary citizens. Critics argue this constitutes a form of collective punishment, a blunt instrument that harms the population it ostensibly seeks to liberate.
Furthermore, the US stance has polarised the international community. While allies like the UK and several Latin American nations followed Washington's lead in recognising Guaidó, other global powers, including Russia and China, have firmly backed Maduro, turning Venezuela into a proxy battleground for wider geopolitical rivalries.
The Legacy and The Future
The intervention raises critical questions about the future of sovereignty and international law. By unilaterally deciding which government it deems legitimate, the US sets a precedent that weaker nations can be subject to external political engineering based on the preferences of a more powerful state. This undermines the principle of self-determination and recalls the 'gunboat diplomacy' of a past era.
Ultimately, Trump's Venezuela policy serves as a potent reminder that the instincts of American imperialism never fully disappeared; they merely awaited a political climate willing to activate them. The return to such overt interventionism marks a significant shift from earlier post-Cold War foreign policy and signals a more confrontational approach to international relations, with lasting consequences for the Western Hemisphere and beyond.
