Executive Summary
On January 3, 2026, the United States launched Operation Absolute Resolve, conducting airstrikes across Venezuela and capturing President Nicolás Maduro. This unprecedented military intervention represents a fundamental shift in international relations with significant implications for global governance, regional stability, and Singapore’s foreign policy positioning.
Case Study: Operation Absolute Resolve
Background & Context
Escalation Timeline:
- August 2025: US military buildup in southern Caribbean begins
- September 2025: US strikes vessels allegedly trafficking drugs
- December 2025: Oil tanker seizures intensify
- January 2-3, 2026: Trump approves operation; strikes launched at 2:00 AM local time
Stated Justifications:
- Narco-terrorism charges against Maduro
- Contested 2024 Venezuelan elections
- Humanitarian concerns and migration pressures
- Drug trafficking allegations
Operational Details:
- At least 150 aircraft involved in the operation
- Multiple targets hit including Fort Tiuna, La Carlota airport, military bases
- Delta Force captured Maduro and his wife, who were flown to New York to face narco-terrorism charges
- No US casualties reported; minimal US injuries
Legal & Diplomatic Dimensions
International Law Questions:
- No UN Security Council authorization obtained
- No Congressional approval sought before strikes
- Violation of sovereignty principles under UN Charter
- Constitutes forcible regime change
Global Reactions:
- UN and several world leaders expressed concern about the operation
- China strongly condemned the action
- France warned against externally imposed solutions
- Senator Ruben Gallego called it an illegal “war of choice”
- UK Prime Minister sought to “establish facts” before commenting
US Post-Intervention Strategy
Trump stated the US will “run” Venezuela temporarily until a safe transition occurs, including:
- Direct US administrative control
- Deployment of US troops (“not afraid of boots on the ground”)
- US oil companies to rebuild infrastructure
- Working with Vice President Delcy Rodríguez (not opposition leader María Corina Machado)
- Exploitation of Venezuelan oil reserves
Outlook: Regional & Global Implications
Short-Term (0-6 months)
Venezuela:
- Political vacuum and potential power struggles
- Humanitarian crisis likely to worsen initially
- Military loyalty uncertain
- Civil unrest and security breakdown risks
Latin America:
- Regional alarm over sovereignty violations
- Potential migration surge from Venezuela
- Other leftist governments (Cuba, Nicaragua, Bolivia) on high alert
- OAS and regional bodies face legitimacy test
Global:
- UN credibility crisis on sovereignty norms
- Precedent for unilateral military interventions
- Emboldening of other powers to act similarly
- International law framework under strain
Medium-Term (6 months – 2 years)
Geopolitical Shifts:
- Possible Chinese/Russian retaliation or countermoves elsewhere
- Strained US relations with traditional allies
- Latin American pivot away from US sphere
- Increased Global South skepticism of Western rules-based order
Economic:
- Venezuelan oil production disruption initially, then potential increase
- Oil market volatility
- Sanctions regime uncertainty
- Foreign investment hesitation in unstable regions
Security:
- Insurgency or resistance movements in Venezuela
- Refugee crisis affecting neighboring Colombia, Brazil, Trinidad
- Drug trafficking route disruptions creating new pathways
- Potential for “Vietnam syndrome” if US gets bogged down
Long-Term (2+ years)
International Order:
- Erosion of sovereignty norms
- Reduced restraints on great power interventionism
- UN system further weakened
- Possible emergence of competing security frameworks
Regional Architecture:
- Realignment of Latin American alliances
- Strengthened China-Latin America ties
- New security arrangements excluding US
- BRICS expansion momentum
Solutions & Policy Options
For Venezuela
Immediate Priorities:
- Humanitarian corridors and aid delivery
- Dialogue between all Venezuelan political factions
- International observers for any transition process
- Protection of civilian infrastructure
- Refugee support in neighboring countries
Medium-Term:
- Inclusive constitutional process
- Free and fair elections with international monitoring
- Justice and reconciliation mechanisms
- Economic reconstruction with diversified international support
- Professional military reform
For the International Community
Diplomatic Track:
- Emergency UN Security Council session
- International Contact Group formation (including neutral parties)
- OAS-led regional mediation
- ICJ referral on legality questions
- Multi-stakeholder dialogue platforms
Normative Response:
- Reaffirmation of sovereignty principles
- Development of clearer R2P criteria and constraints
- Strengthening of international law mechanisms
- Treaty on prohibitions of unilateral interventions
Economic Support:
- Coordinated humanitarian assistance
- Refugee burden-sharing arrangements
- Conditional reconstruction aid tied to democratic progress
- Oil market stabilization measures
Impact on Singapore
Strategic Implications
Direct Concerns:
- Sovereignty Principles Under Threat
- Singapore’s entire foreign policy rests on respect for sovereignty
- As a small state, Singapore is vulnerable if interventionism becomes normalized
- Precedent threatens ASEAN’s foundational principles (non-interference, peaceful coexistence)
- Rules-Based Order Erosion
- Singapore’s prosperity depends on predictable international law
- Unilateral military action undermines multilateralism
- Questions about when international rules apply and to whom
- US Credibility as Security Partner
- Singapore maintains close defense ties with US
- Action raises questions about US judgment and restraint
- Potential strain on bilateral relationship if Singapore criticizes
Regional Dimensions:
- ASEAN Implications
- Similar sovereignty concerns across Southeast Asia
- Uncomfortable parallels with historical great power interventions in region
- Tests ASEAN unity on sovereignty principles
- China Factor
- China strongly condemned the US action
- Beijing may cite Venezuela as justification for its own actions
- Complicates Singapore’s balancing act between US and China
- Potential Chinese arguments: “If US can intervene for ‘democracy,’ we can for ‘reunification'”
- South China Sea Parallels
- If military force becomes acceptable tool for resolving disputes
- Reduced international constraints on Chinese assertiveness
- Singapore’s position on freedom of navigation potentially weakened
Economic Impact
Energy Markets:
- Short-term oil price volatility affecting Singapore’s refineries
- Potential new supply from Venezuela (eventually) benefits refiners
- Uncertainty affects regional energy security planning
Trade & Investment:
- Increased geopolitical risk premiums
- Possible impact on Singapore’s role as stable investment hub
- Latin American investment climate uncertainty
Financial Services:
- Sanctions compliance complexity increases
- Venezuelan asset freezes and legal disputes
- Potential secondary sanctions risks
Foreign Policy Positioning
Diplomatic Tightrope:
Singapore faces difficult choices:
Option A: Principled Opposition
- Publicly criticize violation of sovereignty
- Risk US displeasure and relationship strain
- Strengthen credibility with Global South and China
- Align with core ASEAN principles
Option B: Quiet Acquiescence
- Avoid direct criticism of US action
- Maintain strong bilateral relationship
- Risk appearing unprincipled to regional partners
- Undermine long-term credibility on sovereignty
Option C: Nuanced Middle Path (Most Likely)
- Express concern about precedent without naming US
- Emphasize importance of international law and UN Charter
- Support multilateral transition process
- Engage diplomatically with all parties
- Focus on humanitarian aspects
Recommended Singapore Response:
- Public Diplomacy:
- Issue statement emphasizing sovereignty principles without direct condemnation
- Call for UN-led transition process
- Offer humanitarian assistance to Venezuela
- Stress importance of international law for all countries, large and small
- Regional Leadership:
- Work within ASEAN to develop coordinated response
- Engage ASEAN dialogue partners on sovereignty concerns
- Strengthen regional norms against intervention
- Build bridges between US and concerned Asian nations
- Bilateral Engagement:
- Private dialogue with US on Singapore’s concerns
- Explain why sovereignty matters to small states
- Seek US understanding of Singapore’s need to speak on principle
- Maintain defense cooperation while addressing policy differences
- Multilateral Action:
- Support UN discussions on Venezuela
- Participate in any international contact groups
- Contribute to humanitarian efforts
- Work within Non-Aligned Movement on sovereignty issues
Long-Term Strategic Adjustments
Defense & Security:
- Review dependence on single security partner
- Strengthen multilateral security engagement
- Increase defense self-reliance investments
- Deepen security ties with middle powers (Australia, Japan, India, UK)
Diplomatic Diversification:
- Reduce perception of being in any single camp
- Strengthen ties with Global South
- Enhance role in UN and international institutions
- Build coalition of small states on sovereignty issues
Economic Resilience:
- Further diversify trade and investment partnerships
- Reduce vulnerability to sanctions regimes
- Strengthen regional economic integration
- Build strategic reserves and redundancies
Conclusion
The US intervention in Venezuela represents a watershed moment in international relations with profound implications for Singapore. As a small state dependent on international law and sovereignty norms, Singapore faces strategic challenges that require:
- Principled Consistency: Upholding sovereignty regardless of which power violates it
- Strategic Pragmatism: Maintaining relationships while defending core interests
- Regional Leadership: Working through ASEAN to strengthen collective voice
- Long-term Vision: Preparing for more contested international order
The Venezuela crisis is not merely a Latin American issue—it is a test case for whether the international system will respect the sovereignty and equality of all states, or revert to might-makes-right principles that endanger small nations everywhere. Singapore’s response will signal whether it remains committed to its founding principles even when inconvenient, and will shape its credibility and influence for years to come.
Key Takeaway for Singapore: In an era of renewed great power competition and weakening international constraints, small states must invest in coalitions, institutions, and principles that constrain power—because without such restraints, sovereignty becomes a privilege of the strong rather than a right of all nations.