By Dr. Arun Mitra
Venezuela’s acting President, Delcy Rodríguez, was in India recently. This was known in advance because, even before the Government of India made any statement on the matter, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio had already announced it during his visit to India. It has now become a common occurrence that the United States makes public statements about what India is going to do in the future, and only afterward does the Indian government speak about it.
Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, along with his wife, was taken into custody by the U.S. government on January 3, 2026, from his residence at night and imprisoned in the United States. He was accused of drug trafficking and spreading narcotics in the United States. No evidence or confirmation of these allegations has been presented; however, once President Trump made the accusation, it was published by newspapers around the world, and Maduro was arrested and charged. Earlier, in 1989, Panama’s ruler Manuel Noriega was similarly detained by the United States in Panama on charges of drug trafficking. Similarly Patrice Lumumba of democratic republic of Congo and Salvador Allende of Chille were assassinated by the US in a very clandestine manner. In the name of restoring democracy in other countries, the United States has launched numerous interventions, notably in Iraq and Libya, where heads of state were ultimately killed.
After Maduro’s removal, Venezuela’s government reportedly altered its course considerably under American pressure, and discussions began suggesting that maintaining good relations with the United States would be in the country’s best interest. Hugo Chávez, who preceded Maduro as President of Venezuela, had ended the control exercised by American companies over Venezuela’s oil resources. For that reason, he was never viewed favourably by the United States. After Chávez’s untimely death, Maduro became president and continued the same policies. However, it appears that the current President Rodríguez has chosen a path of compromise.
The significance of her visit lies in the fact that India will now purchase oil from Venezuela. In practical terms, buying oil from Venezuela today means purchasing oil from American companies that are engaged in oil extraction and refining operations there. Previously, India bought oil from Russia and Iran, often at lower prices and with trade conducted in rupees. Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has even stated that Iran is ready to supply oil to India at lower prices and in exchange for rupees, provided India is willing to buy it.
Because of sanctions imposed by the U.S. President Trump, India has been discouraged from purchasing oil from Russia and Iran. Although some exemptions were granted from time to time, these restrictions are reportedly back in force, compelling India to buy oil from sources favoured by the United States. It is important to note that Iran and Russia are geographically closer to India; their oil is cheaper, of good quality, and transportation costs and delivery times are lower. Venezuela, by contrast, is much farther away. Oil shipments from Venezuela can take up to 40 days to reach India, whereas shipments from Iran generally arrive within 10–12 days. Consequently, Venezuelan oil is likely to be more expensive, costlier to refine, and must be purchased in U.S. dollars. This is likely to have a direct and serious impact on India’s economy.
Recent reports suggest that India has sold gold worth 12 billion dollars. The government has not provided any clarification on this matter. There are reports that Prime Minister Narendra Modi himself quietly visited the United Arab Emirates and oversaw the sale. If true, this would be a matter of great national significance. It is occurring at a time when the UAE maintains close relations with both Israel and the United States, while several other Gulf countries are attempting to distance themselves from American influence.
The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has stated that it did not sell any gold in April, whereas Bloomberg’s report refers to gold sales in May. The RBI usually provides regular information regarding the status of the country’s gold reserves, but no clarification has yet been issued concerning the reported May transactions.
All this indicates that the Indian government has become increasingly aligned with U.S. policy and has effectively surrendered to pressure from President Trump.
For a country as large as India, this is a matter of serious concern. India is now the world’s most populous nation, and there is no shortage of talented and intelligent young people. Indian professionals continue to demonstrate exceptional achievements in the United States and other countries. Yet in the sphere of geopolitics and strategic affairs, India’s role is seldom mentioned alongside the major powers. Discussions repeatedly focus on Russia, China, and the United States as the three principal global powers, while India is increasingly viewed merely as a large market.
In a changing world, Russia and China are cooperating on many issues and expanding their influence in geopolitics. A growing number of developing countries in the Global South are strengthening their ties with these two nations.
India’s foreign exchange reserves are reportedly declining rapidly. Prime Minister Narendra Modi repeatedly describes India as a “Vishwaguru” (world teacher). He appears unconcerned about making such false cooked up claims. The world is aware of the actual state of education in India. Economically weaker sections remain deprived of quality school and higher education. The condition of examinations and educational standards has become widely discussed. Not a single Indian university currently ranks among the world’s top 100 institutions.
The situation in healthcare is similar. Much of the sector has become corporate-controlled, while quality public healthcare remains weak. Unemployment among young people aged 19 to 29 is estimated at between 15 and 20 percent, a deeply troubling figure for any country. The social fabric has weakened and continues to be strained. Atrocities against Dalits, minorities, and women are frequently reported.
In this context, Prime Minister Modi visited Israel at a time when preparations for a U.S.-Israeli attack on Iran were reportedly complete. In the Israeli Parliament, he condemned Hamas attacks but did not mention the deaths of approximately 70,000 Palestinians, including 20,000 children, resulting from Israeli military actions. Instead, he stated that India stood with Israel and would continue to do so under all circumstances. Later, when Israeli actions resulted in the deaths of schoolchildren in Iran, Modi did not publicly comment. Israeli leaders have stated that after the United States, India is their closest friend, while few other countries maintain such close relations.
RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat recently stated that India is ready to become a “Vishwaguru,” but that internal preparations remain inadequate. He also remarked that the world respects only the strong. Does this imply that India should strengthen itself militarily, maintain close ties with countries such as Israel, and continue purchasing weapons and technology from them?
Instead of focusing on pressing national issues, the Modi government has increasingly diverted attention toward historical controversies, while development has stagnated. Hosting the G20 summit was celebrated extensively, with posters displayed everywhere, but no substantial benefits appear to have followed. Now India is participating in Quad meetings, where the United States has effectively assigned India the role of a sentinel in the Indo-Pacific region.
India also holds the presidency of BRICS. However, the recent BRICS foreign ministers’ meeting concluded without significant results, reportedly because India avoided condemning Israeli and American actions against Iran.
In South Asia, India’s relations with its neighbors are strained. Relations with Pakistan remain poor, and ties with China remain difficult. India seeks to compete with China, but lacks comparable economic, technological, and military capabilities. India’s trade with China remains heavily imbalanced. China possesses significant economic influence, military strength, and advanced technology. It has also made clear that it will not allow Pakistan’s sovereignty to be threatened.
Under these circumstances, repeated discussions of military action and references to “Operation Sindoor” risk increasing the possibility of conflict. In the event of war, it is evident that China would support Pakistan, and India would find it extremely difficult to confront both countries simultaneously.
The time has come for India to pursue peace initiatives in South Asia. Cooperation among India, Pakistan, and China would not only advance the region’s development but could also provide a positive example for the world and strengthen prospects for peace. Acting as a strategic outpost of American diplomacy would be extremely harmful for India.
Recent developments have also demonstrated that countries such as Iran have been capable of challenging American power. India must therefore pursue an independent foreign policy based on its own national interests rather than functioning as an extension of U.S. strategic objectives. (IPA Service)
