At the dawn of 2026, the U.S. government—following meticulous planning—dispatched troops to apprehend Venezuelan President Maduro and his wife, bringing them back to U.S. soil to stand trial; this event sent shockwaves across the globe. The United Nations and numerous European nations swiftly expressed grave concern, deeming the move a violation of international law and the rules-based international order, and fearing that such an escalation would plunge the region into even greater instability.
A deeper reason for the profound impact of Maduro’s capture lies in what it reveals: following his return to the presidency, U.S. President Trump is prepared to translate his stated geopolitical views and vision for the global landscape into reality—even if it entails resorting to the use of force. While military might has long served as the strategic bedrock of international politics—and indeed, the very foundation of the U.S.-led world order—the decades following the Cold War witnessed the emergence of a rules-based model of global interaction. This model, forged through the convergence of multilateral trade reciprocity and the United Nations system, generally succeeded in maintaining global peace and stability, ensuring a measure of security for most nations, and fostering widespread prosperity.
The United States and Venezuela were not at war when the U.S. launched its unilateral military operation to apprehend Maduro—an action undertaken without authorization from the United Nations. Moreover, the move was no longer cloaked in diplomatic rhetoric; instead, it was openly declared as a direct bid to seize control of Venezuela’s oil reserves. The “Trump Doctrine”—a Trumpian iteration of the Monroe Doctrine—articulated in the new U.S. National Security Strategy, is backed by the world’s most formidable military machine. Consequently, Maduro’s capture serves as a bold declaration of intent to assert control over the entire Western Hemisphere, warning major powers such as China and Russia to abandon any designs on the Americas. Against this backdrop, the Trump administration’s rhetoric regarding the “acquisition” of Greenland—a self-governing territory of Denmark—has left Denmark and other European nations deeply unsettled. They feel compelled to take the matter with the utmost seriousness and have felt obliged to publicly affirm their unwavering support for Denmark. Should the Greenland issue fail to be resolved amicably, U.S.-European relations could fracture further, causing the maintenance of the international order to lose even more of its central equilibrium.
Yet, demanding that other major powers refrain from meddling in the Americas does not equate to isolationism. The “America First” agenda is imbued with the underlying ethos of “civilizational politics”—defined by a narrow conception of national interest—yet it harbors no intention of relinquishing U.S. influence in other regions, such as the Middle East and the Indo-Pacific. The overriding priority is simply that U.S. engagement must serve U.S. interests—a departure from the traditional, broader ideals of liberal democracy or the liberal international order as a purely conceptual framework. This shift in diplomatic posture and underlying philosophy will have profound implications for the international order. If other regional powers were to emulate the U.S. approach—acting within their respective spheres of influence through deterrence or the use of force—no small or medium-sized nation in the world would be able to find peace. International relations founded upon rules, the spirit of contractual obligation, and mutual trust would cease to be reliable. Nations large and small would be compelled to ramp up their investments in armaments and military intelligence, thereby indirectly heightening the risk of armed conflict.
Just the day before yesterday, President Trump announced his intention to withdraw from 66 international organizations—a move that deals a severe blow to the credibility of institutions such as the United Nations. International organizations constitute a vital component of the global order and institutional framework, serving as an additional safeguard for world peace. Yet, under pressure from an assertive United States, these bodies now face the prospect of falling into dire straits; consequently, the resolution of many international issues may henceforth require direct engagement with the White House. The United States seeks to maintain its global dominance while simultaneously abdicating its responsibility to uphold the international order and safeguard the global commons—issues such as climate change and global pandemics. This stance will severely diminish the prospects for effectively addressing the world’s pressing challenges.
“Trumpism” originally set out to rectify domestic political and economic ills within the United States, while simultaneously seeking to overhaul U.S. foreign relations that were perceived as disadvantageous. However, this corrective impulse has overshot its mark, evolving instead into a repudiation of the very international system and institutional framework that the United States itself played a leading role in constructing. In the long run, this approach will inevitably backfire, ultimately undermining America’s own interests.
As a small nation, Singapore must view these sudden and turbulent shifts in the global landscape with the utmost vigilance and trepidation, responding with prudence and caution. We must steadfastly uphold the spirit of self-reliance and solidarity that has defined our nation since its inception. In our diplomatic and economic relations, we must continue to exercise the wisdom of collaboration and pragmatism—cultivating friendly ties with a broad spectrum of nations, identifying new avenues for cooperation, expanding trade horizons, and fostering the trust and consensus necessary to address global challenges through collective action. Concurrently, all nations must remain resolute in upholding international law; for in a world devoid of rules, every nation—regardless of its size or scale—will ultimately fall victim to the ensuing chaos.
