Ramzy Baroud and Romana Rubeo
THE unfolding geopolitical tension linking Venezuela and Iran appears to follow a familiar historical pattern in American foreign policy. At critical moments of global transition, Washington has often used dramatic interventions against smaller states to demonstrate military strength before expanding its influence in strategically vital regions.
This pattern helped define the early post-Cold War era. Yet attempting to reproduce the same model today may represent a profound strategic miscalculation.
The global environment that allowed the United States to project overwhelming power in the early 1990s has fundamentally changed.
Panama: Demonstrating American Power
In December 1989, the United States invaded Panama and captured its leader, Manuel Noriega. The operation was publicly justified as an effort to combat drug trafficking and restore democracy.
However, the invasion served another purpose. It was a demonstration of American military reach at a moment when the global balance of power was shifting dramatically.
The Soviet Union was collapsing, and Washington sought to assert itself as the dominant force in the emerging international order. Panama, a relatively small and politically vulnerable country long dependent on the United States, provided a stage on which American military power could be displayed with limited risk.
The message was clear: Washington had both the capacity and the will to reshape governments and political systems wherever it deemed necessary.
From Panama to Iraq
Soon after the Panama invasion, the United States launched the Gulf War against Iraq in 1991 following Baghdad’s occupation of Kuwait.
While the war was publicly framed as an operation to liberate Kuwait, it allowed Washington to establish an extensive military infrastructure across the Middle East. American bases spread throughout the Gulf, reinforcing US dominance in one of the world’s most strategically important regions.
Together, Panama and Iraq formed what appeared to be a successful geopolitical model. A dramatic intervention against a smaller state demonstrated American strength, followed by a major military campaign that reshaped the political order of an entire region.
For many in Washington, the lesson seemed clear: decisive displays of force could consolidate American global leadership.
The Iraq War and the Illusion of Control
Yet the strategy eventually revealed its limitations.
The 2003 invasion of Iraq attempted to deepen the same approach by directly reshaping the Middle East through regime change. Instead, it produced prolonged instability, fueling sectarian conflict, contributing to the rise of armed groups such as ISIS, and destabilizing the region for years.
While the invasion demonstrated overwhelming military power, it failed to secure the lasting political control Washington had sought.
The consequences forced American policymakers to reconsider their global priorities, eventually leading to the Obama administration’s strategic “pivot to Asia.” In retrospect, Iraq marked the beginning of the erosion of the model first demonstrated in Panama.
Venezuela and Iran: A Familiar Sequence
Recent developments suggest that Washington may be attempting to revive elements of this strategy.
The kidnapping of Venezuela’s elected president, Nicolás Maduro, occurred shortly before the escalation of American and Israeli military pressure on Iran. Maduro has long been one of the most outspoken supporters of Palestine and a vocal critic of US foreign policy.
Venezuela also maintains strong diplomatic and economic ties with Iran, reflecting broader political alliances among states that often frame their policies as part of a wider struggle against Western dominance.
In this sense, the sequence linking Venezuela and Iran echoes earlier patterns connecting Latin America and the Middle East. Yet the similarities largely end there.
Iran Is Not Iraq
Unlike Iraq in the early 1990s, Iran is not a politically isolated or militarily weakened state.
Despite internal political disagreements, economic challenges, and periodic protests, Iran remains a cohesive society with strong institutional structures and a powerful military apparatus. Its political system has proven capable of maintaining internal stability while projecting influence across the region.
Iran also possesses significant military capabilities, including missile programs, asymmetric warfare strategies, and regional networks that allow it to respond to external pressure in ways that Iraq under sanctions was largely unable to do.
In short, the structural conditions that made Iraq vulnerable in the 1990s no longer exist in the same way today.
A Network of Allies
Equally important is the broader geopolitical environment in which Iran operates.
When Iraq faced the United States in the early 1990s, the Soviet Union had collapsed, and no major power was prepared to challenge Washington directly. Iraq was effectively isolated.
Iran today faces a very different international landscape.
China has emerged as a major economic partner for Iran and for much of the Middle East. Russia maintains strategic cooperation with Tehran and has repeatedly emphasized its opposition to attempts at destabilizing the Iranian state. While neither country has entered the conflict directly, their diplomatic, economic, and strategic support prevents Iran from being isolated in the way Iraq once was.
At the same time, Iran maintains strong relationships with regional allies often described as part of the “axis of resistance,” including several powerful movements across the Middle East.
These networks significantly complicate any attempt to reshape the region through confrontation with Tehran.
A Changing Global Order
Perhaps the most important difference between the early 1990s and today is the transformation of the international system itself.
Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States briefly enjoyed a period of near-uncontested global dominance. Washington could project power across regions with limited geopolitical resistance.
That era has ended.
China’s economic rise, Russia’s renewed geopolitical assertiveness, and the growing influence of Global South alliances such as BRICS have created a far more complex international landscape.
Many states now operate within a multipolar system in which American power remains significant but no longer decisive.
In this context, the attempt to reproduce the geopolitical sequence that once linked Panama and Iraq may represent a fundamental misreading of the current moment.
The intervention in Panama helped demonstrate American power at the dawn of the unipolar era. The war against Iraq reinforced that dominance.
Today, the events linking Venezuela and Iran may instead illustrate the opposite phenomenon.
Rather than reaffirming American supremacy, they may reveal the limits of a geopolitical strategy designed for a world that no longer exists.
Iran’s internal cohesion, its regional networks, and the broader shift toward a multipolar global order all suggest that the old model of American power projection is unlikely to succeed again.
And if that is the case, Washington’s attempt to revive that strategy may not restore its global dominance—but instead accelerate the erosion of it.
______________
Dr. Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of six books. His latest book, co-edited with Ilan Pappé, is ‘Our Vision for Liberation: Engaged Palestinian Leaders and Intellectuals Speak out’. His other books include ‘My Father was a Freedom Fighter’ and ‘The Last Earth’. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA). His website is www.ramzybaroud.net
-Romana Rubeo is an Italian writer and the managing editor of The Palestine Chronicle. Her articles appeared in many online newspapers and academic journals. She holds a Master’s Degree in Foreign Languages and Literature and specializes in audio-visual and journalism translation. The article first appeared in Palestine Chrinicle.
