🔗 Share this article

As the skyline of Venezuela lit up under a barrage, observers witnessed the disturbing indicators of a waning global power. This may seem paradoxical. Ultimately, the act of kidnapping a foreign leader and proclaiming intentions to govern a country could be seen as hubris—a superpower drunk with its own might.

But, a primary virtue of this stance, so to speak, is bluntness. Earlier administrations cloaked blatant national interest in the rhetoric of “democracy” and “civil liberties”. This new posture dispenses with the pretense. During a prior statement, the logic behind an energy seizure was laid out explicitly.

This viewpoint is outlined in a freshly issued strategic document. The document concedes something long ignored in powerful corridors: that an era of uncontested international dominance is at an end. It states with scarcely hidden contempt that the time of carrying the entire world order are done. These pronouncements serve as an blunt obituary for a bygone status.

“After years of neglect, a renewed focus of a 19th-century policy will restore preeminence in the Americas.”

That principle, formulated in the early 19th century, purported to block European colonialism. Historically, it laid the foundations for regional domination over a Latin American back yard.

Conflict in Latin America backed by outside forces is far from unprecedented. Numerous citizens sheltered exiles fleeing rightwing dictatorships that were installed after progressive governments were deposed in orchestrated coups. The reasoning at the time was clear: halting a state from going a certain direction due to the choices of its population. Parallel rationale underpinned alliance with brutal governments across the region.

An Evolving Region

Yet in recent decades, that domination has been questioned. A tide of progressive governments, led by influential leaders, sought to assert greater regional independence. And, crucially, a main global rival—the Eastern power—has increased its influence across the continent. Two-way commerce between China and the region soared exponentially over a few generations. This nation is now the continent's primary economic associate, trailing only one other. At the end of a cold war, it did not even place in the top 10.

The recent action against Venezuela is just the initial salvo in an attempt to reverse all of these changes.

The Evolution of a Presidency

The events of a previous administration led many to conclude that the strongman was full of hot air. Back then, an understanding was reached with the political class. The tacit agreement was clear: pass tax cuts and deregulation, and public venting would be overlooked. The current iteration represents a unadulterated nationalist administration.

Whenever threats are issued at the democratically elected heads of state of other nations—take it seriously. When statements are made about countries being “ripe for change,” believe him. And whenever claims are made about wanting a massive Arctic landmass—believe him. The goal to acquire over two million sq km of sovereign territory appears real.

The Implications of Expansion

If—when such a land grab occurs, what follows? The weak global answer to a brazenly illegal attack would not go unremarked. But a seizure of partner state soil would surely spell the collapse of a key alliance, established on the principle of collective defence. Territory would be stolen no less blatantly than other acts of aggression. Whatever quiet protests emerged from allied nations, the defensive bloc would be over.

Following the dissolution of a superpower adversary, leaders were certain they were unbeatable in war and that their economic model represented the endpoint of social progress. That hubris led directly to failure in overseas engagements and a global financial crash. Visions of a better world gave way to a succession of disasters. The resulting mass disillusionment gave rise to a nationalist response. However the “Homeland First” reaction to shifting fortunes is to abandon world leadership in exchange for a continental sphere of control.

The Internal Price

What will that leave the nation itself? Historical precedent offers cautions. After previous overseas conquests, prominent dignitaries established an anti-imperialist league. They declared that the doctrine of expansionism was opposed to democracy and encouraged militarism—an evil from which the republic had remained apart.

“It is claimed that no republic can long survive partly democratic and partly imperial, and we warn that imperialism abroad will lead swiftly and surely to despotism at home.”

Ultimately, economic influence supplanted formal rule, and the republic—always imperfect—survived.

Which analyst would reject such warnings as hyperbole today? What happens internationally cannot be decoupled from developments at home. This is the colonial backlash, as defined decades ago by a critical author examining how overseas empire boomeranged to the mainland in the shape of totalitarianism. We have already watched a “security doctrine” backfire in such a fashion: its rhetoric and framework recycled for internal control. Rival factions are described as “domestic extremist” entities. National guard troops are dispatched into metropolitan areas like {