Power, Pretence and the Politics of Intervention: Western Democracy, Imperial Logic, and the Crises of Venezuela and Nigeria,by Ahmad Shuaibu Isa
Before exploring the subject, it is important to reflect on three African proverbs from Fulfulde, Hausa, and Kanuri. The first states, “Ko ndiyam jogii ndiyam, wonaa ko dow wuro o ndiyam fota,” meaning even if water is abundant, it must flow from within the land and not be poured upon it. The second says, “Ba bako ne zai gyara gidan da mai gida bai gyara ba,” meaning it is not the stranger who fixes a house when the owner has not. Finally, the Kanuri proverb, “Kela ngela sera, tem dega tem kerge,” reminds us that he who drags you from danger may chain you in safety. These proverbs highlight the importance of local agency and caution against the imposition of external solutions.
The international system is formally built on state sovereignty, self-determination, and the prohibition of the use of force. In practice, however, global relations are shaped by imbalances of power. The United States’ actions in Venezuela and Nigeria demonstrate how Western democracy, when projected abroad, can depart from its professed ideals and take on an imperial character.
These cases reveal a recurring pattern in which legality, morality, and democracy are subordinated to strategic interests and resource control.
In Venezuela, the forcible removal of the sitting president violated Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter. There was no claim of self-defence and no authorisation from the Security Council. Head-of-state immunity, a cornerstone of sovereign equality, was bypassed. Any objective thinker will surely describes this as state kidnapping.
This violation exemplifies a growing crisis in the rules-based international order, where laws increasingly bind weaker states while leaving powerful states largely unaccountable.
Classical realism explains this behaviour.
READ ALSO: Africa’s tomorrow is in your hands: Will you answer the call?, by Ahmad Shuaibu Isa
Realist theory emphasises that states pursue power and security, not morality. Venezuela’s vast oil reserves and geopolitical independence made it a rational target for intervention. In this case, the democratic rhetoric of the United States functions more as ideological cover than genuine motive. In simple economic terms, the decision can be expressed as a utility function:
U = R + S − C > 0
Where U is the net gain from intervention, R is the value of resources, S is strategic influence, and C is the cost, including political and diplomatic risks. When perceived benefits outweigh costs, intervention becomes the rational choice.
Similarly, the humanitarian effects of militarisation can be expressed mathematically. Let I represent insecurity, M represent militarisation, and H represent civilian harm. Empirical evidence shows that:
dI/dM > 0 and dH/dM > 0
READ ALSO: A silent collapse of the future in Northern Nigeria, by Ahmad Shuaibu Isa
This indicates that increasing military action tends to increase both insecurity and civilian suffering. In other words, the more external force is applied, the more instability is often created.Nigeria presents a different but equally concerning case. The crisis there stems from internal governance failures, including insecurity, elite fragmentation, and weak state capacity. Social contract theory emphasises that the government must protect the life and welfare of its citizens. External intervention cannot replace this obligation. Military action without consent violates sovereignty and undermines legitimacy, which comes from local recognition and support.
Dependency theory clarifies the risks. Foreign military involvement increases structural dependence, allowing domestic elites to avoid responsibility while external powers gain influence. Constructivist theory explains how interventions are justified through selective narratives. In Nigeria, complex conflicts involving governance, ethnicity, economics, and the environment have been simplified into claims of religious persecution. This narrative allows external powers to act decisively while obscuring the real causes. Ideas, as much as weapons, are instruments of power.
From a sociological perspective, modern imperialism works less through formal occupation than through coercive influence disguised as assistance. World-systems theory positions Venezuela and Nigeria as peripheral states within a global hierarchy. Their resources and institutional weaknesses make them especially vulnerable. In such contexts, Western democracy ceases to be emancipatory and instead functions as a tool to discipline or reorder weaker states according to the priorities of the powerful.
The humanitarian consequences of these interventions are severe. Forcible removal of leadership creates political vacuums, increases violence, and fractures social cohesion. Rather than resolving crises, these actions internationalise them, inviting proxy struggles and long-term instability. Liberal internationalism warns that when powerful democracies violate the norms they promote, global trust is undermined and imitation by other states is encouraged.
Internal failure must also be acknowledged. Nigerian governance cannot be ignored. Sustainable peace and security require local reform, inclusive institutions, and accountable leadership. External intervention substitutes short-term coercion for long-term political repair, often worsening the problems it claims to solve. The proverbs highlighted earlier reinforce this truth: lasting solutions must originate within the community or nation itself, not be imposed from outside.
READ ALSO: Africa is Tired but Not Defeated, Nigerians Are Frustrated but Not Finished, by Ahmad Shuaibu Isa
Ultimately, the cases of Venezuela and Nigeria expose a central paradox. Western democracy, when detached from legality, restraint, and contextual understanding, risks becoming indistinguishable from imperial power. A genuinely progressive international order requires aligning power with principle and intervention with consent. Until that is achieved, solutions to crises such as Nigeria’s lie not in foreign force but in local agency, and global stability depends on holding powerful democracies accountable to the laws and norms they themselves have established.
Follow the Neptune Prime channel on WhatsApp:
Do you have breaking news, interview request, opinion, suggestion, or want your event covered? Email us at neptuneprime2233@gmail.com
