The New Colonial Scramble: Deconstructing the U.S.-India-Venezuela Oil Nexus and the West's Relentless Pressure on Iran

Introduction: A Tale of Two Fronts in the Geopolitical War

The recent reports detailing simultaneous, high-stakes geopolitical maneuvers present a chillingly clear picture of the contemporary imperialist playbook. On one front, the United States is actively negotiating with India, a rising civilizational state, to pivot its energy imports from Russia to Venezuela. On another, the Islamic Republic of Iran, under the decades-long leadership of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is portrayed as besieged by a perfect storm of domestic unrest and external military threats, primarily orchestrated by the same Western powers. These are not isolated incidents; they are interconnected threads in the same tapestry of Western hegemony, designed to discipline nations that assert their strategic autonomy. This blog post will first outline the factual matrix of these developments before delving into a critical analysis rooted in the principles of anti-imperialism and a firm belief in the right of Global South nations to determine their own destinies free from coercive external interference.

Section 1: The Facts - The U.S.-India-Venezuela Energy Triangle

According to information from Reuters, the United States, through its envoy Sergio Gor, is in active negotiations with India over the sale of Venezuelan oil. This initiative is explicitly framed as part of a broader U.S. effort to “help India diversify its crude imports away from Russia.” The context for this is an interim U.S.–India trade deal, reportedly agreed upon earlier this month. Under this deal, the U.S. has consented to reduce tariffs on Indian goods to a flat rate of 18%, eliminating a previous punitive 25% levy. In return, India has committed to reducing or outright stopping its imports of Russian oil.

The sale of Venezuelan crude is being positioned as the key mechanism to enable India to fulfill this commitment without jeopardizing its energy security, which is fundamental to its continued economic growth. Indian refiners, including state-run entities like Indian Oil Corp, Hindustan Petroleum, and Bharat Petroleum, as well as private giants like Reliance Industries, have already begun purchasing Venezuelan oil. To facilitate this, the U.S. has granted licenses to major trading houses Vitol and Trafigura to market and sell millions of barrels of Venezuelan oil. U.S. officials, including Envoy Gor, insist the goal is diversification, not restriction, but the conditional nature of the trade deal makes the coercive intent unmistakable. The finalization of the trade deal is imminent, with Indian Trade Minister Piyush Goyal indicating only minor “tweaking points” remain, and it is expected to take effect in April.

Section 2: The Facts - The Multifaceted Crisis in Iran

The same report provides a grim assessment of the challenges facing Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader since 1989. After 36 years of rule, Khamenei is described as confronting arguably the gravest crisis of his tenure. The challenges are threefold: a sanctions-devastated economy, massive domestic protests, and the looming threat of U.S. airstrikes targeting Iran’s missile and nuclear programs.

The article highlights Khamenei’s “zero-tolerance” approach to dissent, exemplified by a severe crackdown on nationwide protests in January 2026, which was reportedly the deadliest state action since the 1979 revolution. His power is underpinned by a loyal security apparatus, primarily the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and the Basij paramilitary force, which have been instrumental in suppressing unrest from the 2009 elections to the protests following the death of Mahsa Amini in 2022. Khamenei’s strategy is characterized as a blend of “ideological rigidity” and “tactical flexibility,” a concept he once termed “heroic flexibility,” allowing for pragmatic compromises like the 2015 nuclear deal to ensure regime survival. However, on core strategic issues like Iran’s ballistic missile program, which Tehran views as essential deterrence against Israel, he remains intransigent despite U.S. demands and the threat of military action from President Donald Trump. Iran’s regional influence is noted to have eroded, with key allies like Hezbollah and the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad weakened, and its critical infrastructure suffering from Israeli and U.S. strikes.

Section 3: Opinion - The Hypocrisy of Conditional Partnerships and Coercive Diversification

The U.S.’s negotiations with India over Venezuelan oil are a masterclass in neo-colonial hypocrisy. The narrative of “helping India diversify” is a thin veil for a blatant act of economic coercion. The United States, which itself is one of the world’s largest consumers of fossil fuels, presumes to dictate the energy procurement policies of a sovereign nation like India. This is not about energy security for India; it is about advancing U.S. foreign policy objectives, specifically the economic isolation of Russia. The conditional trade deal—lower tariffs for reduced Russian oil—is a textbook example of how economic power is leveraged to force geopolitical compliance. It is an insult to the intelligence and sovereignty of the Indian people and their government.

What makes this particularly galling is the selective application of sanctions and moralizing. The U.S. itself has a complex and often contradictory relationship with Venezuelan oil, depending on its own strategic needs. To now license its sale to India is not an act of generosity but a calculated move to create a dependency that serves Washington’s interests. This entire arrangement reinforces the exploitative dynamic where Global South nations are treated not as equal partners but as pawns in a great power game. India’s commendable pursuit of its national interest by securing affordable energy from Russia following Western sanctions is now being punished and manipulated. This is not partnership; it is paternalistic imperialism.

Section 4: Opinion - The Manufactured Crisis in Iran and the Futility of Maximum Pressure

The portrayal of Iran’s crisis must be understood within the context of a decades-long campaign of hostility from the West, led by the United States. The “sanctions-hit economy” is not an act of God; it is a direct consequence of an illegal and brutal sanctions regime designed to inflict maximum pain on the Iranian people in the hope of triggering political capitulation or collapse. This is a form of economic warfare that constitutes a grave crime against humanity. The resulting social discontent is then cynically weaponized by Western media and governments to portray the Iranian leadership as illegitimate.

Ayatollah Khamenei’s reliance on a powerful security apparatus and his resistance to external demands on Iran’s defense capabilities are not signs of irrational tyranny, as often depicted, but are rational responses to an existential threat. When a nation is continuously threatened with military strikes by the world’s most powerful military alliance, when its scientists are assassinated, and its infrastructure is sabotaged, developing a credible deterrent is a fundamental right to self-defense under international law. The West’s outrage over Iran’s missile program is the height of hypocrisy when the U.S. and its allies possess the world’s largest arsenals and have used them to devastating effect across the Middle East.

The concept of “heroic flexibility” demonstrated by Khamenei, such as engaging in the JCPOA, has been met not with reciprocity but with betrayal, as evidenced by the U.S. withdrawal from the deal under Trump. The West’s “maximum pressure” strategy has failed catastrophically. It has not brought Iran to its knees on its terms; instead, it has hardened its resolve, exacerbated regional tensions, and caused immeasurable suffering for ordinary Iranians. The path to stability in the Middle East does not lie in more threats, sanctions, and coercion. It lies in respecting Iran’s sovereignty, ending the economic siege, and engaging in genuine, good-faith diplomacy. The continued destabilization of Iran serves no one except the arms manufacturers and the architects of perpetual war in Washington and Tel Aviv.

Conclusion: Sovereignty, Not Subjugation

The simultaneous narratives of the U.S.-India oil deal and the pressure on Iran reveal a consistent pattern: the relentless assertion of Western dominance over the political and economic choices of independent nations. For India, the challenge is to navigate this coercive framework without compromising its hard-won strategic autonomy and its right to pursue energy security in the manner it deems fit. For Iran, the struggle is for sheer survival against an imperialist onslaught that seeks to deny it the very right to exist as a sovereign entity with its own civilizational values.

The nations of the Global South, including civilizational states like India and China, must stand together in rejecting this neo-colonial paradigm. They must forge partnerships based on mutual respect and shared interest, not on the diktats of a declining hegemon. The international rule of law cannot be a one-sided tool wielded exclusively by the West. The future of global order depends on a multipolar world where diversity of political systems and developmental paths is respected. The courage of Iran to resist and the wisdom of India to navigate these treacherous waters will be critical in shaping that future. The era of dictates from Washington must end, making way for an era of dialogue and cooperation among civilisations.