🔗 Share this article

As the skyline of Venezuela flashed amidst a barrage, observers saw the disturbing indicators of a fading hegemony. It could appear counterintuitive. Ultimately, the act of kidnapping a foreign leader and declaring intentions to administer a nation looks like intoxication—a superpower intoxicated by its own might.

However, a primary virtue of this approach, for lack of a better term, is frankness. Earlier governments draped naked strategic goals in the discourse of “liberty” and “civil liberties”. The current posture dispenses with the facade. During a recent comment, the thinking behind an resource acquisition was articulated explicitly.

This viewpoint is outlined in a newly released policy paper. The document acknowledges something long denied in powerful corridors: that an era of absolute world leadership is finished. It states with thinly veiled scorn that the days of bearing the global system are finished. These words serve as an unceremonious obituary for a former standing.

“After years of neglect, a renewed focus of a longstanding doctrine will restore leadership in the regional sphere.”

This doctrine, articulated in the 1800s, professed to deter European colonialism. In practice, it established the basis for hemispheric control over a Latin American back yard.

Violence in Latin America facilitated by external powers is not novel. Numerous families took in refugees fleeing rightwing dictatorships that were established after leftist governments were deposed in supported upheavals. The justification at the time was explicit: halting a country from going a certain direction due to the choices of its population. Parallel logic justified support for murderous regimes across the region.

A Shifting Region

Yet in the last thirty years, that domination has been contested. A tide of progressive leaderships, pioneered by prominent presidents, sought to establish greater regional independence. Significantly, a primary global rival—the Asian giant—has increased its influence across the region. Mutual commerce between this power and Latin America exploded immensely over a few decades. China is now the continent's second largest economic associate, trailing only one other. Towards the close of a previous global conflict, it did not even rank in the major players.

The current assault against Venezuela is merely the first step in an attempt to undo all of these changes.

The Evolution of a Presidency

The tenure of a first term led many to believe that the strongman was all bluster. Back then, an accommodation was reached with the traditional elite. The tacit agreement was straightforward: deliver corporate-friendly measures, and rhetorical outbursts would be allowed. This new incarnation represents a full-fat far-right regime.

When warnings are leveled at the popularly voted leaders of regional powers—believe him. If pronouncements are made about sovereign states being “ready to fall,” pay attention. And if comments are made about wanting a vast sovereign land—believe him. The intention to annex over two million sq km of sovereign territory appears sincere.

The Repercussions of Acquisition

If—when such a territorial acquisition occurs, what follows? The weak international reaction to a brazenly illegal attack would not go unnoticed. However a seizure of allied sovereign territory would surely spell the demise of a key alliance, established on the principle of shared security. Land would be appropriated no less brazenly than other acts of aggression. No matter the diplomatic murmurs emerged from other capitals, the transatlantic partnership would be irreparably damaged.

Following the dissolution of a major rival, policymakers were certain they were all-powerful and that their economic model represented the final stage of social progress. That arrogance led directly to failure in overseas engagements and a economic meltdown. Visions of utopian dreams gave way to a succession of disasters. The resulting mass disillusionment fueled a populist surge. And the “Country First” reaction to perceived decline is to abandon global dominance in favor for a regional hegemony.

The Homefront Cost

What will that do to the domestic society? Historical precedent offers admonitions. After past overseas conquests, prominent figures founded an anti-imperialist league. They declared that the policy of expansionism was hostile to liberty and tended toward authoritarianism—an threat from which the republic had remained apart.

“The warning was that no nation can long survive partly democratic and partly imperial, and we warn that expansion overseas will lead quickly and inevitably to repression internally.”

Ultimately, informal empire took the place of direct colonialism, and democratic institutions—always fractured—endured.

What observer would discount such warnings as hyperbole in the present climate? Actions overseas cannot be separated from developments at home. This is the overseas blowback, as described decades ago by a critical author examining how European colonialism returned to the continent in the shape of authoritarianism. The public has already watched a “war on terror” rebound in this way: its terminology and logic repurposed for internal control. Political opponents are branded as “subversive” groups. Military personnel are sent into city streets like {