Amidst split global opinion on Trump’s strike on Maduro, Modi government plays it safe

As world leaders divided themselves into two clear camps, either opposing or supporting the U.S. attacks on Caracas and its capture of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, the government played a cautious line.

In its statement issued on Sunday (January 4, 2026), calling the evolving situation in the South American country a matter of “deep concern”, the Ministry of External Affairs did not refer to the United States or to the U.S. forces attacking the Venezuelan capital and taking Mr. Maduro captive, nor did it refer to UN principles.

Russia, China, Brazil, South Africa, and others in the Global south condemned the U.S. action as a violation of international law. On the other hand, the U.S.’s main allies in Europe, including Germany and France, supported the move, calling for a peaceful transition to a new “legitimate” leadership. Both China and Russia have also demanded that the U.S. release Mr. Maduro and, along with Colombia, have requested a meeting of the United Nations Security Council on Monday (January 5, 2026).

In comparison, India’s statement only called upon “all concerned” to resolve issues through dialogue, along with expressing solidarity with the Venezuelan people.

The government’s response was also in contrast to India’s response to a similar operation in 1989, when U.S. forces took Panamanian President Manuel Noriega captive and tried him in U.S. courts. In a speech in Parliament, then Foreign Minister I.K. Gujral had “deplored” the U.S. actions, invoking the U.N. charter and the principle of non-intervention.

Diplomatic experts said the Modi’s government’s response to the present situation was in line with recent Indian positions on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran, and Israel’s bombardment of Gaza, where the government has decried the aggressions without naming the aggressors.

“In situations where our statements don’t make enough of a difference, the government’s calculation would be to avoid very strong protests. In addition, we are at a crucial point in trade deal negotiations with the U.S., and need to tread cautiously,” pointed out Deepak Bhojwani, who has served as India’s Ambassador to seven South American countries including Brazil, Venezuela, Colombia and Cuba. He referred to the U.S. actions as a “fait accompli” to the world.

Another former Ambassador said that the MEA statement was not as strong as had been expected, especially on the clear violation of international law by the U.S., but added that this reflected India’s considerably lower stakes in Venezuela. In 2018, U.S. sanctions pressured India to stop oil trade with Venezuela, then one of its largest suppliers, and left two major Indian projects in developing oilfields in San Cristobal and Carabobo.

According to the MEA’s brief on bilateral relations, Mr. Maduro had requested a visit to India in August 2020, presumably an effort to resume the stalled projects. While that visit never materialised, Venezuela’s Executive Vice-President and current Acting President Delcy Rodriguez, who had served with Mr. Maduro and former President Hugo Chavez, has made three official visits to India in the past decade, leading delegations to Delhi in 2016, 2019, and 2023.

The experts said that it was necessary to wait and see what situation emerges now inside Venezuela, given that the U.S. has removed Mr. Maduro, but not the military-backed establishment in the country. Nor has there been a move to install the opposition leader and latest Nobel laureate Maria Machado or former diplomat Edmundo González Urrutia, who lives in exile in Spain and had been recognised by the U.S. and European countries as the winner of the 2024 elections. It remains to be seen whether the Modi government will now reach out to any of the leaders, including Ms. Rodriguez, who will govern the country post-Maduro.

“New Delhi will watch carefully whether the U.S. will now withdraw sanctions on Venezuela which had forced Indian companies to give up profitable contracts there,” Mr. Bhojwani added, referring to India’s decision to end imports of discounted crude from Iran and Venezuela, and the recent U.S. pressure to stop imports of Russian oil.

The government’s worries would grow, however, if the Trump administration’s unilateral strike against Venezuela is a precedent for U.S. interventions in other countries with unfriendly governments in the region, beginning with neighbouring Colombia, that goes to polls in 2026, Nicaragua, and Cuba, and even Brazil, given tense Trump-Lula ties. As chair of the BRICS summit in 2026, New Delhi will be under pressure to ensure a common perspective on these issues, even as it works on repairing its own ties with the U.S.