Venezuela and the Limits of Power

US intervention in Venezuela triggers global reactions. (Photo: Wiki Commons)

What This Intervention Reveals About Governance

The events of the past days in Venezuela have shocked many observers. For some, they have brought a sense of relief after years of political paralysis, economic collapse, and human suffering. For others, they have raised deep unease about the means that were used and the precedent that may have been set. Both reactions are understandable.

What matters now is not only what happened, but how we interpret it. The question before us goes beyond immediate reactions. It concerns how power is exercised, how legitimacy is constructed, and whether force can substitute for governance. What has unfolded reaches far beyond Caracas. The central issue has shifted and is no longer only about who governs Venezuela.

The analytical toolkit I developed in Dare We Hope? offers a structured way to approach this moment.

The Compass Tool: Multiple Forces That Clash

Seen through the Compass Tool, this intervention did not emerge in a vacuum. It is the result of several long-term forces that have been accumulating for years.

First, Venezuela has suffered a profound erosion of political legitimacy. Electoral processes lost credibility, institutions weakened, and trust between state and society collapsed. Second, economic implosion and sanctions distorted incentives across the system, rewarding survival strategies over reform and hollowing out state capacity. Third, regional fatigue grew as migration pressures increased and diplomatic efforts failed to produce results. Finally, geopolitical signaling returned to the Western Hemisphere, with external actors such as China and Russia seeking to reassert influence and demonstrate resolve.

When such forces remain unresolved, pressure builds. Eventually, decision-makers are tempted to reach for decisive action. The Compass Tool reminds us that when multiple forces collide, dramatic outcomes become more likely. It also warns us that forceful outcomes rarely address the deeper causes that produced them.

The Prism Tool: Power, Control, and Zones of Influence

The Prism Tool helps distinguish between power and control, and between removing obstacles and governing a system.

Arresting or removing a leader is an act of power. Governing a country is an act of legitimacy, process, and institutional continuity. These two are often confused. History shows repeatedly that decapitation strategies may change facts on the ground, but they do not automatically generate order.

This is where a deeper dynamic appears. Zones of influence are often described as a relic of the past. In reality, they are very much alive. The assumption that a major power can determine political outcomes within its perceived sphere reflects a logic that never disappeared. Yet this logic stands in direct contradiction to the rules-based international order that many states claim to defend.

That contradiction matters. The international order rests on sovereignty, self-determination, and agreed process. Zones of influence rest on hierarchy and coercion. When the two are mixed, legitimacy erodes. Not only locally, but globally. The Prism Tool reveals that selective application of rules weakens the very norms that are meant to stabilize the system.

The Ladder Tool: A Crisis Across Governance Levels

The Ladder Tool shows why Venezuela cannot be understood at a single level.

At the domestic level, the immediate challenge is not symbolism but control of institutions. Security forces, courts, public administration, and basic services determine whether daily life continues or collapses. Removing a leader does not automatically align these elements.

At the regional level, reactions matter greatly. Latin America carries a long historical memory of external interventions. Even governments critical of the former leadership may resist legitimizing methods that undermine sovereignty. This can fracture regional cooperation precisely when it is most needed.

At the international level, the implications are systemic. Precedents are watched carefully. What is justified in one case may be invoked in another. The Ladder Tool makes clear that actions taken at one level reverberate across all others. When alignment is missing, instability multiplies rather than recedes.

The Linchpin Tool: Why Legitimacy Now Dominates Everything

The Linchpin Tool anchors analysis in core principles. In this case, three principles dominate the debate.

Sovereignty remains a cornerstone of international order, not because governments are flawless, but because alternatives invite arbitrary power. The non-use of force is not an abstract norm, but a practical safeguard against escalation and fragmentation. Self-determination is not a slogan, but a condition for durable political order.

Even those who long argued that Venezuela needed political change now face a dilemma. Can an outcome produced by contested means generate lasting legitimacy. Can order imposed from outside be sustained without broad acceptance inside.

These questions do not excuse past failures. They simply recognize a hard truth. Legitimacy cannot be imported. It must be built through process, inclusion, and credible pathways forward.

Beyond Venezuela: A Broader Lesson

Venezuela is not an isolated case. It is a mirror. We are entering an era in which power is easier to apply than legitimacy is to construct. Military, economic, and technological capabilities allow rapid intervention. Governance, by contrast, requires patience, restraint, and respect for process.

The real test for the international community is not whether it can act, but whether it can align power with law and legitimacy. Without that alignment, short-term gains risk producing long-term instability.

This is one of the central lessons I explore in Dare We Hope?. Sustainable peace and stability do not emerge from force alone. They emerge when power is embedded in a credible framework of governance, accepted rules, and shared responsibility. Venezuela reminds us how costly it becomes when that balance is lost.