Article 2: A bully blinks
Why in news: Recent U.S. military strikes on Venezuela and Iran, coupled with an intensified blockade of Cuba and Russia’s defiant fuel shipment, have revived debates on unilateralism and the weakening of global order.
Key Details
- U.S. assertiveness: Second-term Trump administration adopts a coercive, unilateral foreign policy approach.
- Military interventions: Strikes on Venezuela and Iran highlight strategic control over oil-rich regions.
- Cuba blockade: Severe fuel shortages and humanitarian distress due to tightened U.S. restrictions.
- “Donroe Doctrine”: Symbolises neo-imperial ambition, prioritising power over international norms.
- Russia’s response: Successful fuel delivery to Cuba exposes limits of U.S. dominance and scope for global resistance.
Aggressive U.S. Foreign Policy Shift
- Since beginning his second term, Donald Trump has pursued a highly assertive and coercive foreign policy.
- The U.S. adopted a unilateral and force-driven approach, resembling coercive global dominance.
- This shift marked a departure from rule-based international conduct toward power politics.
Military Actions in Venezuela and Iran
- The U.S. launched military interventions in Venezuela and Iran in 2026.
- In Venezuela, President Nicolás Maduro was captured after U.S. operations .
- In Iran, large-scale strikes targeted strategic sites like Kharg Island .
- These actions were widely seen as strategic interventions in oil-rich regions.
Economic Strangulation of Cuba
- The U.S. imposed a severe oil blockade on Cuba, cutting off supplies.
- Pressure tactics forced countries like Mexico to halt oil exports to Cuba .
- This resulted in fuel shortages, blackouts, and humanitarian distress on the island.
- The broader aim appeared to be regime change under economic pressure.
Emergence of the “Donroe Doctrine”
- This aggressive policy has been labelled the “Donroe Doctrine”, echoing expansionist ambitions.
- It reflects a belief that power overrides international norms and sovereignty.
- The U.S. assumed lack of resistance equals strength, reinforcing coercive behavior.
Russia’s Intervention and Limits of U.S. Power
- Russia challenged U.S. pressure by sending an oil tanker to Cuba.
- The tanker successfully delivered fuel despite tensions .
- The U.S. did not escalate, exposing limits to its enforcement power.
- This shows that collective resistance can counter unilateral dominance.
Conclusion
Recent developments reveal tensions between unilateral power and global resistance. While U.S. actions reflect strategic dominance, responses like Russia’s support to Cuba indicate limits to coercion. The crisis underscores the fragility of the international order, where smaller nations face pressure but also find space for solidarity. Sustaining a rules-based system requires collective assertion that sovereignty and cooperation outweigh coercive dominance.