Editorial

The drama that unfolded in faraway Venezuela exposed the JVP-NPP Government’s two-pronged, some say two-faced, policy of keeping its Marxist ideological base intact domestically but, thankfully, staying alive to the real world of geopolitics.

Its party headquarters condemning in the strongest terms the kidnapping of the president of one sovereign country by another, while its own government deftly passing the ball to the United Nations, expressing its ‘deep concern’ while wishing the best for the ‘people of Venezuela’, omitting any reference to the ‘President’ of Venezuela—the man at the centre of the storm—was revelatory, in a sense.

It was the first time that the Government’s political transition came so sharply to the point of departure from its long-time reputation, first as a revolutionary party, then as a leftist party, and now as a centrist party. The citizens will be left to make sense of the ruling party echoing the sentiments of China and what is left of the leftist world, and the Government refusing to echo those views. Count the number of countries that condemned ‘American Imperialism’ and they can be counted on one’s fingers. The UN Secretary-General issued a weak-kneed statement with the gun of US de-funding pointed at his head. The statement referred to a violation of the UN Charter but ‘balanced’ it with bad governance issues in Venezuela.

Even Venezuela’s Acting President had to double down on her first statement condemning the USA for a flagrant infringement of her country’s sovereignty by later calling for ‘cooperation’ in handling the situation.

Venezuela, despite its abundance of natural resources, has made a mess of its economy due to successive socialist governments living in the past, and as one of the last bastions against capitalism and American Imperialism. This resulted in nationalisation of foreign assets and US sanctions that dragged its people into poverty. Many fled the country in search of a better life. But how is Sri Lanka to point fingers given its own record of bankruptcy in 2022 that saw people queuing up at the passport office from dawn?

At the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), Venezuela repeatedly opposed resolutions against Sri Lanka, maintaining the principle of non-interference in the affairs of sovereign states. That was part solidarity, part self-preservation.

One thing to be said about the incumbent US President is he talks straight, though sometimes with his foot in his mouth. He made no bones about the fact that kidnapping a sovereign Head of State was about oil. However, running Venezuela from the White House will be easier said than done. Beyond the military powerhouse, there is a disastrous history of US interventions violating the sovereignty of other nations, more recently Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan, which were left in chaos.  Will that be the fate of Venezuela?

As for the UN and international law, President Trump this week brushed aside checks on his use of military might to strike or invade nations around the world. In the new US National Security Strategy, international organisations are considered an impediment to US ‘sovereignty’ in pursuing its own interests in the world. As for the rest of the world, however, it was precisely with reference to these very norms of sovereignty and prohibition on the use of force established by international law, including the UN Charter, that they have condemned the US action. ‘The principles of the UN Charter safeguard the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of all states, especially small states,’ Singapore said, reminding the world of the indispensable role of multilateral institutions and placing collective security through international law above a re-descent into international anarchy through great power politics, force and interests.

This selective approach to international law when it serves US ‘national interest’—“it depends what your definition of international law is,” the US President said this week—will also boomerang on the US itself on other fronts. The US, after all, considers China’s claims in the Indo-Pacific a challenge to the ocean governance regime under the UN Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS) and to a free and open Indo-Pacific that is vital for its trade and security.For Sri Lanka, the more significant aspect of the Venezuelan saga is when the US State Department and the ‘Donroe Doctrine’ say the Western Hemisphere is “ours”.

If this is a signal to other major military powers to carve out their own turfs in their respective hemispheres, the littoral states of the Indian Ocean better watch out again for great power competition in their backyards—consider the recent high-level Indian visit to Sri Lanka only to be followed by tomorrow’s visit by his Chinese counterpart.

America on a war footing

It was an order everyone knew was coming, and this week it was made official: the Trump Administration in Washington withdrawing from membership and pulling out of funding several organisations worldwide that it has found ‘not serving the interests of the United States of America’.

The US worldview has always been ‘America first’, but this new exercise is taking it to a new level; a new low. Some may still argue that the Executive Order issued this week targets climate change projects; child-welfare projects in war zones (where the US weapons industry is making billions selling its arms to sectarian groups fighting each other); a string of United Nations agencies; and those doing work in areas such as Democracy; the Rule of Law, Justice and the like. Sri Lanka has been directly hit by closing the tap on the Colombo Plan.

And what is more, the Presidential Order says there’s more to come as the review of US membership and funding is a ‘work in progress’. Simultaneously, the US President is threatening to curb defence industry bosses’ pay at home to force them to rearm the US more quickly. Military contractors will not be allowed to pay executives more than USD 5 million until they build new factories. America has been put on a virtual ‘war footing’ from the look of it.

Where will this new trigger-happy trajectory in US policy take the world order?  In his first term at the White House, the incumbent President was seemingly better advised by his inner circle from a gung-ho policy overseas. That group has been replaced now by what is evidently a set of modern-day cowboys elbowing each other to genuflect before their boss, in a plus royaliste que le roi or ‘more loyal than the king’ approach to Trump policy, bold enough to even bypass its own Congress, leave alone the UN Security Counci, in decision-making.