By Suresh Unnithan
In the early days of 2026, the world watches with bated breath as President Donald Trump’s foreign policy takes an increasingly aggressive turn. Following the military strike on Venezuela, Trump has openly speculated about interventions in Greenland, Cuba, Iran, and even Colombia and Mexico. These moves, framed by the administration as necessary for “protecting commerce, territory, and resources core to national security,” echo a dangerous resurgence of imperialism. Trump, like an imperialist, seeks to usurp the territories unwilling to follow American policies and U.S. commercial interests. For instance, he has issued veiled threats to India, expressing dissatisfaction with its oil trade with Russia. Trump has also warned of hiking tariffs if India acts against his wishes, exemplifying his coercive approach. If left unchecked, Trump’s actions could unravel decades of fragile international peace, emboldening other powers like China and Russia to pursue their own territorial claims. The consequences could be catastrophic: heightened global tensions, economic disruptions, and a slide back into the colonial-era of the 17th century, where might make right. This article explores the imperative for the international community to counter these moves, delving into their potential ramifications and drawing lessons from America’s history of interventions in regions like Kuwait, Iraq, and Iran. Particular emphasis is placed on the urgency for India to react decisively, given its precarious geopolitical position amid hostile neighbors increasingly aligned with China and, in some cases, supported by the United States.
Trump’s recent actions paint a picture of unchecked ambition. Just days into the New Year, U.S. forces conducted airstrikes in Venezuela, capturing President Nicolás Maduro in what the White House described as a decisive blow against “socialist threats” in the Western Hemisphere. This operation was justified by claims of protecting American interests in Venezuelan oil reserves—the world’s largest. But the ripple effects were immediate: Trump followed up with public warnings to other nations. In a press conference, he predicted the “demise” of Cuba’s government, threatened Colombia over alleged drug trafficking ties, and reiterated his interest in acquiring Greenland from Denmark for its strategic Arctic position and mineral resources. He even hinted at actions against Iran, citing ongoing nuclear concerns, and Mexico for border issues. These statements have sparked global alarm, with European leaders condemning them as “reckless” and Latin American nations fearing a new era of U.S. dominance in the region.
On a geopolitical level, Trump’s moves could erode the norms of international law established post-World War II. The United Nations Charter prohibits the use of force against sovereign states except in self-defense or with Security Council approval. By bypassing these mechanisms—as seen in the Venezuela strike—Trump sets a precedent that weakens global institutions. If the U.S. can unilaterally intervene for resources like oil and minerals, why shouldn’t China assert its claims over Taiwan, which it views as a breakaway province? An emboldened China might interpret U.S. actions as a green light for invasion. Similarly, Russia’s ongoing claims over disputed territories, such as those in Ukraine or even Arctic regions overlapping with Greenland interests, could escalate. India, too, faces Chinese intrusions in Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh, areas integral to its sovereignty but claimed by Beijing. If Trump’s expansion spree continues unchecked, New Delhi’s ability to rally international support against such incursions would be undermined.
For India, the urgency to counter Trump’s aggression is particularly acute, as it grapples with a ring of hostile neighbours increasingly under China’s sway, some of whom also receive support from the United States. Pakistan has deepened its ties with China through initiatives like the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which not only boosts economic links but also enhances military cooperation. In 2025, Pakistan sought to form a new South Asian bloc with Bangladesh and China, explicitly aiming to exclude India, which could further isolate New Delhi regionally. Bangladesh, another neighbour with historical tensions, has seen growing Chinese influence through defence supplies and economic investments, while also exploring closer ties with Pakistan, including eased visa policies and bilateral trade. This tripartite cooperation—China, Pakistan, Bangladesh—poses a direct strategic challenge to India, as it could encircle the country with aligned powers. Adding to the complexity, the United States has renewed its relations with Pakistan in 2025, signing several agreements and marking a thaw after years of drift, including counter-terrorism cooperation and potential arms deals. Similarly, U.S. ties with Bangladesh have focused on commercial benefits, treating it individually in trade policies. This dual support from China and the U.S. to India’s adversaries amplifies the threat, making Trump’s broader imperialistic posture a catalyst that could embolden these alignments.
Beyond Pakistan and Bangladesh, other South Asian nations are drifting closer to China, heightening India’s vulnerabilities. Sri Lanka, burdened by debt, has received significant Chinese investments in infrastructure like the Hambantota Port, which has raised concerns about debt-trap diplomacy and potential military use. Nepal, sharing a long border with India, has expanded defence cooperation with China, including military supplies, amid political shifts that favour Beijing. Myanmar, too, has seen China’s footprint grow through economic and military engagements, particularly in the context of its internal conflicts and border proximity to India’s northeast. These developments reflect China’s strategic push in South Asia, encompassing economic, political, and military domains, which directly undermines India’s regional influence. As China positions itself as an expansionist power—evident in its claims over Arunachal Pradesh and Ladakh—India’s worries are compounded. If Trump’s aggressions go unchallenged, it could normalize such behaviour globally, allowing China to accelerate its encroachments without fear of unified international backlash. For India, already countering China’s influence through partnerships like the Quad, failing to react to Trump risks a domino effect: weakened U.S. alliances in the Indo-Pacific, further isolation, and heightened border tensions that could escalate into conflict.
Economically, the fallout could be devastating, with India facing direct pressures from Trump’s policies. The U.S. is already grappling with a staggering national debt of approximately $38 trillion, which surpasses its gross domestic product (GDP) of around $28 trillion as of late 2025. This debt trap, exacerbated by years of military spending and tax cuts, makes aggressive foreign policies even riskier. Interventions like the one in Venezuela require billions in funding, straining an already overburdened budget. Moreover, Trump’s actions appear motivated in part by a desire to secure resources amid threats to U.S. dollar dominance. For decades, the petrodollar system—where oil is traded globally in U.S. dollars—has underpinned American economic hegemony. But this is crumbling. Venezuela, under Maduro, had begun trading oil with China in Yuan rather than dollars, bypassing U.S. sanctions. Similarly, India has engaged in oil trades with Russia using rupees and rubles, avoiding the dollar to circumvent Western restrictions following the Ukraine conflict. Russia and China have sealed $20 billion in oil deals settled in Yuan in 2025 alone. Other nations, including Saudi Arabia, are exploring Yuan-based oil trades, with reports indicating partial shifts away from the dollar. Even broader de-dollarization trends are evident: over 70 countries have entered non-dollar bilateral trade agreements by 2025, according to IMF data. Trump’s pressure on India to halt Russian oil purchases has intensified, with warnings of higher tariffs if New Delhi continues. In 2025, the U.S. imposed a 25 per cent duty on India’s Russian oil imports, escalating to threats of 50 per cent tariffs on Indian goods. This economic coercion, amid India’s energy needs, underscores the urgency for India to reciprocate firmly.
Environmentally and humanely, the costs are equally alarming. Military interventions often lead to widespread destruction and displacement. Venezuela’s strike has already displaced thousands, with reports of civilian casualties and infrastructure damage. Expanding to Greenland could worsen climate vulnerabilities in the Arctic, where melting ice caps are already a global concern. Cuba and Iran, both under long-standing U.S. sanctions, face humanitarian crises that could worsen with direct action. The broader risk is a chain reaction: China’s potential move on Taiwan could disrupt global semiconductor supplies, while Russian escalations might cut off European energy. For India, this could mean supply chain disruptions in critical sectors like technology and defence, further strained by neighbouring alignments with China. This could bring back the world to an imperialistic order reminiscent of the British Empire in the 17th century, where colonial powers carved up territories for resources, leading to endless wars and exploitation.
To understand the gravity, one must examine America’s history of aggressions, which provides a cautionary tale. The U.S. has a long record of military interventions driven by strategic and economic interests. In 1990, Iraq under Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, prompting the U.S.-led Gulf War (Operation Desert Storm). A coalition of 42 countries, authorized by the UN, expelled Iraqi forces in 1991, but the operation involved massive air strikes and ground assaults, resulting in over 200,000 deaths, including civilians. While successful in liberating Kuwait, it sowed seeds for future conflicts, including the no-fly zones over Iraq that lasted until 2003. The 2003 invasion of Iraq, based on flawed intelligence about weapons of mass destruction, toppled Hussein but unleashed chaos: sectarian violence, the rise of ISIS, and an estimated 200,000 to 1 million Iraqi deaths. The war cost the U.S. trillions and destabilized the Middle East, contributing to refugee crises and terrorism.
Iran presents another chapter of U.S. aggression. In the 1980s, during the Iran-Iraq War, the U.S. supported Iraq with intelligence and arms, despite Hussein’s use of chemical weapons. More recently, under Trump’s first term, the U.S. withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal in 2018 and imposed “maximum pressure” sanctions. In 2020, a drone strike killed Iranian General Qasem Soleimani, an act Iran called “state terrorism” and which nearly sparked full-scale war. Attempts to foment regime change through covert operations have persisted, mirroring failed efforts in Cuba via the Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961. These interventions often backfire: the Gulf War empowered extremists, Iraq’s invasion created power vacuums, and Iran tensions have only hardened Tehran’s resolve, pushing it closer to nuclear capabilities.
This pattern reveals a cycle: initial victories followed by long-term quagmires. Trump’s current spree risks repeating it on a grander scale, with India potentially caught in the crossfire due to its strategic position. The world must unite to counter this. Diplomatic pressure through the UN, economic sanctions on aggressive actors, and alliances like the Quad (U.S., India, Japan, and Australia) could deter escalations. India, facing Chinese threats and U.S. pressures, should reciprocate Trump’s threats—such as demands to stop Russian oil buys—by asserting its sovereignty, building coalitions with Europe and ASEAN nations, and perhaps exploring alternative energy partnerships. Russia and China, despite their own aggressions, have condemned U.S. actions; a balanced global response could force de-escalation. For India, this means leading regional diplomacy to counter China’s influence in neighbouring countries, while firmly pushing back against U.S. economic aggression to prevent further encirclement.
In conclusion, Trump’s imperialistic moves threaten to drag the world into chaos, undermining peace, economy, and international order. By learning from history’s mistakes in Kuwait, Iraq, and Iran, and addressing root causes like U.S. debt and dollar erosion, the international community can prevent a return to 17th-century colonialism. India’s proactive response is crucial, not just for its own security amid hostile, China-aligned neighbours, but for maintaining regional stability. Unity is not optional—it’s essential for a stable future. The time to act is now, before the aggression spree spirals out of control.
*Inputs from Nanditha Subhadra
