UPSC Issue at a Glance | US–Venezuela Crisis: What happened, why Venezuela, and how it matters for India

The US has since also hinted that it could launch similar operations in more countries. In this context, knowing about the US–Venezuela crisis from a broader perspective becomes essential as it goes beyond immediate geopolitics. It opens up important avenues to understand associated dimensions such as the fentanyl crisis, Venezuela’s strategic oil reserves, from Monroe to ‘Donroe’, and implications for India. 

(Relevance | UPSC Syllabus Mains Examination: General Studies- II: Effect of policies and politics of developed and developing countries on India’s interests.

Going beyond factual topics, UPSC expects to have thinking administrators. Hence, such topics – where you can reflect on what you have read, learnt and observed – become important.  Previously, questions have been asked examining the impact of significant global events such as NATO expansion, the US-Iran nuclear deal, and US-China rivalry on India’s national interests. This highlights the importance for aspirants to link global developments to India’s strategic calculus. You will be able to score high if you are observant enough to know what is going on in current affairs. Thus, knowing about the US–Venezuela crisis becomes essential.)

Question 1: What is the Operation Absolute Resolve?

On January 3, 2026 under Operation Absolute Resolve, the US military went into Venezuela and left with President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, all within three hours, which also effectively ended the Bolivarian Republic that was started by Hugo Chávez in 1999. US President Donald Trump announced the operation on social media and later told reporters that the US would “run the country” until a “safe, proper and judicious transition” could be arranged.

This Operation marked a significant escalation of the long-running standoff with Venezuela after months of strikes on Venezuelan “drug boats” and a massive military build-up in the Caribbean with the deployment of troops, aircraft and warships. The US has accused Maduro of drug trafficking and working with gangs designated as terrorist organisations. 

Captured Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro is escorted, as he heads towards the Daniel Patrick Manhattan United States Courthouse for an initial appearance to face US federal charges including narco-terrorism, conspiracy, drug trafficking, money laundering and others, at Downtown Manhattan Heliport, in New York City, US. (REUTERS)

Maduro has denied these allegations and is currently being held in federal custody at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, New York. Maduro will remain in custody until at least his next scheduled hearing on March 17, 2026. Maduro is being represented by defence attorney Barry Pollack, who is best known for successfully representing WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

Notably, this is hardly the first time the US has intervened in a South American country. The US has a long history of meddling in the affairs of Latin American countries (and elsewhere), one which has seen Washington rig elections, facilitate coups, and undermine democratic processes, all to install acquiescent regimes in strategically important countries.

“Throughout the twentieth century and into the beginning of the twenty-first, the United States repeatedly used its military power, and that of its clandestine services, to overthrow governments that refused to protect American interests,” wrote author Stephen Kinzer in his book Overthrow: America’s Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq (2006).

“Each time, it cloaked its intervention in the rhetoric of national security and liberation. In most cases, however, it acted mainly for economic reasons — specifically, to establish, promote, and defend the right of Americans to do business around the world without interference,” Kinzer wrote.

Question 2: Why did the US attack Venezuela and capture President Nicolás Maduro?

Unlike previous American interventions, US President Donald Trump has not used esoteric ideas such as “exporting democracy” or “liberating the country” to justify Operation Absolute Resolve. For Trump, “It is a national security initiative meant to eliminate a source of tons of cocaine from entering the United States,” José Cárdenas, a former National Security Council and US State Department official who has dealt extensively with Latin America policy, told Newsweek. “Main Street, USA, can identify with that,” he added.

Fentanyl Crisis

Notably, the Operation Absolute Resolve came weeks after Trump began threatening ground strikes in the South American nation, even as he insisted that he would push for regime change as part of his effort to curtail the flow of illegal drugs and immigrants. Last month, he designated “illicit fentanyl and its core precursor chemicals” as weapons of mass destruction (WMD). 

According to the World Health Organisation (WHO), fentanyl is a potent synthetic opioid drug which is used as a pain reliever and as an anaesthetic. The issue with fentanyl is that it can be 30 to 100 times more potent than heroin or morphine and is fast-acting, leading to a rapid and high number of overdose deaths. Fentanyl-related overdoses resulted in more than 69 per cent of the total overdose deaths in the US.

Venezuela’s Oil

Oil is no stranger to conflict. Unsurprisingly, it has emerged as the key factor in America’s capture of Venezuela’s President Nicolás Maduro. Soon after Maduro’s capture, US President Donald Trump said Washington would take control of Caracas’s oil sector and that American majors would pump in billions of dollars to revive the struggling Venezuelan oil industry and fix its broken oil infrastructure.

Venezuela has the largest oil reserves globally, estimated at over 300 billion barrels or a fifth of the proven oil reserves all over the world. The world’s largest oil exporter, Saudi Arabia, is second to Venezuela in terms of proven oil reserves. But Venezuela produces around 1 million barrels per day (bpd) of crude, while global output is over 100 million bpd.  The relatively insignificant oil production by Venezuela, despite massive potential, is a result of a combination of factors that include US sanctions on the country’s oil and gas sector constraining its energy exports, apart from a severe economic crisis in Venezuela and a debilitating lack of investment in the country’s oil and gas infrastructure. 

The US President said major American oil companies would return to Venezuela to refurbish its energy infrastructure, arguing that any US presence would be paid for by “money coming out of the ground.” His remarks revived memories of US-led interventions in Iraq and elsewhere, where control over energy resources became a defining controversy. Venezuela’s government and several international critics accused Washington of using oil as the real motive behind the operation.

Great Power Rivalry

Global power politics also comes into play as one of the factors behind Operation Absolute Resolve. The belief in the US establishment is that if US companies were given licenses to operate in Venezuela, foreign competitors from nations viewed as hostile to US interests — such as China or Russia — would be expelled. This is why international support for Maduro, a protege of Hugo Chávez, has largely been on geopolitical lines. 

Question 3: What concerns arise from President Maduro’s capture by the United States?

The US capture of Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro has raised serious questions and concerns globally. Venezuela’s allies, including China, Russia, Iran, and Cuba, criticised the strikes, warning of destabilisation in Latin America. Colombia’s president called for an emergency UN meeting, while several regional leaders expressed alarm over the scale of the intervention. Inside Venezuela, reactions were mixed. While some citizens expressed shock and fear, others celebrated what they saw as the end of an authoritarian era.

People celebrate after U.S. President Donald Trump announced Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro had been captured and flown out of the country. (AP Photo/Jen Golbeck)

Some of the key concerns arising from the capture of a sitting president of a sovereign country include:

1. Return of US interventionism: One of the key concerns triggered by the U.S. capture of Venezuela’s President, Nicolás Maduro, is the resurgence of American interventionism. At a briefing on January 4, US President Donald Trump, justified the operation as being in line with an over 200-year-old foreign policy agenda set under the Monroe Doctrine of 1823, which warned European powers not to interfere in the affairs of the Western Hemisphere. 

Anil Sasi of The Indian Express writes- “This Doctrine, which Trump has now rebranded as the “Don-roe Doctrine,” has been relegated to foreign policy sidelines for years now. Trump’s move, which he first signalled in the new US security strategy last month, marks a worrying reassertion of the doctrine and return of US interventionism. This tallies with his actions over the past year, when the US demonstrated increasing willingness to use military force around the globe. Just in the last week, Trump ordered airstrikes on Syria and Nigeria. He threatened an intervention in Iran, after widespread demonstrations in Tehran. Earlier in 2025, Trump had targeted nuclear facilities in Iran, attacked drug-trafficking boats in the Caribbean, the Houthi rebel forces in Yemen, militants in Somalia and Islamic groups in Iraq.

2. Legality of the operation: The legality of seizing a sitting foreign head of state without a declared war or UN mandate has been questioned by international law experts. In the US, lawmakers from both parties demanded clarity on the constitutional basis for the strikes. The debate over the legality of the operation continues around the world. The unilateral military action by the US against the sovereign Latin American nation is seen as yet another blow to the post-WWII Rules-Based International Order (RBIO).

Notably, the international order based on the rules enshrined in the United Nations Charter of 1945 is referred to as the rules-based international order. It was established to overcome the gravest consequences of traditional power politics, evident in the devastation of the Second World War, and is based on principles like sovereignty, self-determination, multilateralism, and international law.

3. Revival of great powers’ spheres of influence: Ashiya Parveen of The Indian Express writes– “Trump has called the military operation against Venezuela an update to the Monroe Doctrine – rebranded as ‘Donroe Doctrine‘- enunciated by former President James Monroe in 1823 to cement America’s sphere of influence in Central and South America. It suggests the revival of the imperialist idea of the great powers’ spheres of influence of the 19th century.

In addition, the absence of even an implausible legal justification for the action, alongside Trump’s intent to acquire Greenland, cast a shadow over global stability. It also reflects poorly on other conflicts, like in Gaza and Ukraine. 

The fact that the US is unlikely to face any action from the United Nations Security Council, as America is a member with a veto, prompts Geoffrey Robertson KC, a former president of the UN war crimes court in Sierra Leone, to call the security council a “worthless body”, as reported by The Guardian.”

4. Donroe Doctrine and the Precedent it sets for global order: Amitabh Mattoo writes– “Today, Venezuela is more than a Latin American crisis. It has become a stage on which a new expression of American power is being articulated with unusual clarity. What is being called the “Donroe Doctrine” owes its name to two parents: The nineteenth century “Monroe Doctrine” and the twenty-first-century worldview of Donald Trump.

From President James Monroe, in 1823, came the assertion that the Western Hemisphere constitutes a special strategic space in which external powers have no legitimate role. From Donald Trump in 2026 comes unapologetic primacy, readiness to use force, and the belief that the United States may not only intervene but also supervise political outcomes. This fusion produces the Donroe Doctrine: An explicit claim not just to influence, but to guardianship.

Victor Gillam’s 1896 political cartoon depicting Uncle Sam standing with a rifle between the Europeans and Latin Americans. (Source: Wikimedia Commons)

Three elements give this doctrine its distinctive character. The first is the reassertion of a sphere of influence. The second element is securitisation. The third element is a shift in normative language. Democracy promotion, so prominent in the post-Cold War period, is no longer central. Stability, predictability and control move to centre stage.

The doctrine does not exist in the abstract. It is reflected in a willingness to claim oversight over political transitions and to blur the line between intervention and administration. Whether such ambitions result in sustained trusteeship or remain rhetorical is less important than the signal they transmit: That the United States now reserves for itself a more explicit guardianship role in its hemisphere.

This shift carries serious implications for the international order. The first is the normalisation of spheres of influence. If major powers insist on special rights in their neighbourhoods, the framework of sovereign equality is weakened everywhere. The second is legitimacy. Latin America is not a blank slate. It carries a long memory of external intervention and regime change. Any contemporary experiment in guardianship will inevitably be interpreted through that history. Force can alter governments; it rarely manufactures consent. The third is precedent. Once accepted in one region, doctrines of supervision travel. Other powers will claim analogous rights in their own vicinity.”

Question 4: What are the potential implications of the U.S.–Venezuela crisis for India?

How the situation evolves over the next few weeks and months in Venezuela would be crucial from India’s perspective as well.

Venezuela’s oil and politically acceptable diversification option for India

After US forces captured Venezuela’s President Nicolás Maduro on January 3, US President Donald Trump said that Washington would take control of Caracas’s oil sector and that American majors would pump in billions of dollars to revive the struggling Venezuelan oil industry and fix its broken oil infrastructure.

The potential stabilisation of Venezuela’s oil sector with American intervention could lead to some volumes of Caracas’s discounted crude oil making their way into India’s oil import mix over the medium to long term to the benefit to the more complex refineries in India, even as any material impact in the near term appears highly unlikely, according to industry experts.

Any recovery in Venezuelan oil exports would be positive for India. But Venezuelan heavy and extra-heavy crude oil grades are not suitable for all Indian refineries, and can be processed at only the most complex and advanced units. Consequently, the benefits would accrue unevenly across refiners.

Experts also believe that Venezuelan crude offers India a politically acceptable diversification option amid American pressure on India’s Russian oil imports. Any increase in Venezuelan crude imports is also expected to increase India’s negotiating leverage with its traditional West Asian oil suppliers.

Low Political stakes and high moral dilemma

The US attack on Venezuela and captured its President Nicolas Maduro put India in a diplomatic spot: on the one side is Trump’s unilateral move and, on the other side, is Delhi’s stated position that seeks an international rules-based order.

Shubhajit Roy of The Indian Express writes- Delhi, which is usually conservative and wary of commenting on issues far from Indian borders, is in a bind given that many in the Global South will look to India to underline the need to respect international law, and non-intervention by foreign forces in the internal affairs of a country. Notably, India’s own ties with Venezuela have been of low stakes as well, although it has had a robust history of oil imports from the country.”

The precedents set by Operation Absolute Resolve and the revival of great-power spheres of influence present challenges for India across multiple dimensions. Amitabh Mattoo writes– “For India, the “Donroe Doctrine” poses dilemmas that cannot be addressed by slogans. The first concerns principle and precedent. Sovereignty and non-intervention have been central to Indian foreign policy, not out of sentimentality but as practical safeguards for a post colonial state. A world relaxed about externally supervised transitions cannot automatically be assumed to serve India’s long-term interests.”

The second concerns partnership. A strong and enduring relationship with the United States is vital to India’s interests. After all, India’s convergence with the United States in the Indo-Pacific, technology, defence and maritime security is real and worth deepening. It reflects genuine alignment on many issues. Yet doctrines of guardianship underline a familiar truth: American foreign policy is deeply shaped by domestic politics; tone and method can shift abruptly even when strategy remains constant. Partnerships must therefore coexist with strategic autonomy and independent judgment.”

The third concerns identity and role. India is both an emerging great power in Asia and a principal voice of the Global South. These roles can pull policy in different directions. The challenge is to defend sovereign equality without theatrical moralism, and to pursue national interest without indifference to norms.”

New Delhi’s current approach, restrained, careful, and measured, may be the right one. Silence in international politics is not always hesitation; it can be a strategy. By avoiding grandstanding, India has preserved the space for much-needed cooperation with the United States without endorsing the external management of another country’s political future. But restraint should not become passivity. It should be matched by quiet diplomacy in support of regional mediation, humanitarian relief and economic stabilisation, and by a calm restatement in multilateral forums that guardianship carries long-term costs for the international system.”

Post Read Questions

(1) Consider the following statements : (UPSC CSE 2024)

Statement-I: Recently, Venezuela has achieved a rapid recovery from its economic crisis and succeeded in preventing its people from fleeing/emigrating to other countries.

Statement-II: Venezuela has the world’s largest oil reserves.

Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?

(a) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-I

(b) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-I

(c) Statement-I is correct, but Statement-II is incorrect

(d) Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correct

(2) Consider the following statements with respect to Venezuela’s crude oil:

1. It is home to the largest proven crude reserve on Earth.

2. It accounts for more than 20% of global production.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 only

(b) 2 only

(c) Both 1 and 2

(d) Neither 1 Nor 2

(3) With reference to the fentanyl, consider the following statements:

1. It is a potent synthetic opioid drug used as an analgesic.

2. It is less potent than morphine.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 only

(b) 2 only

(c) Both 1 and 2

(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Prelims Answer Key

1.  (d)   2. (a)      3. (a)

(Source: Maduro’s capture marks the return of US interventionism. Yet again, it’s all about the oil, Beyond Trending: What is rules-based international order?, US Strikes Venezuela: Before explosions in Venezuela’s Caracas, months of tensions over drugs, and an old US interest — oil, The Donroe Doctrine and a dangerous new world, Stabilisation of Venezuela’s oil sector could help India’s complex refineries )

Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter. Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – Indian Express UPSC Hub, and follow us on Instagram and X.

🚨 Click Here to read the UPSC Essentials magazine for December 2025. Share your views and suggestions in the comment box or at manas.srivastava@indianexpress.com🚨