The Russia-Venezuela rapprochement and the tantrums of a stumbling hegemon

Some steps that appear limited on the surface can offer us powerful signs about the deep currents of the international system. The Strategic Partnership Agreement signed by Russian President Vladimir Putin in Caracas in October 2025, and the subsequent landing of a Russian Il-76 transport plane in Venezuela, was neither a major operation on the surface nor an escalation reminiscent of the old Cold War crises. How much strong and sustainable support can Russia, itself at war, offer a country in another hemisphere? Yet, these small gestures made a fundamental reality of the power architecture in Latin America visible again: Latin America is no longer an undisputed U.S. sphere of influence.

For many years, Washington reflexively considered the region its own hinterland. Over time, the Monroe Doctrine morphed from a policy into a mental habit. When combined with the comfort afforded by unipolarity, this habit eroded the strategic focus of U.S. decision-makers on Latin America. An optimistic belief took hold that globalization had replaced geography, and that democracy, the market, and American cultural influence would permanently bind the region to Washington. But the international system follows power relations, not ideological imaginings. Russia’s outreach to Venezuela is therefore no surprise; it is an actor seeing a vacuum and filling it.

An Alliance of Necessity

For years, Venezuela has been the target of sanctions, financial isolation, and diplomatic pressure. The country’s economic collapse, the erosion of its oil infrastructure, and its exclusion from the Western financial system have forced Caracas to seek alternative partners. Moscow saw this as an opportunity both to expand its own non-Western orientation and to build new networks based on common interests with countries encircled by Washington. This rapprochement has no ideological dimension. Neither is Russia interested in Bolivarian socialism, nor is Venezuela a natural part of Russia’s global vision.

What brings the relationship together is a realist, common calculation: two actors, excluded from the Western system, clinging to the strategic opportunities each can offer the other.

The deepening cooperation in energy, defense, logistics, and diplomatic protection was merely formalized with the 2025 agreement. The landing of Russian planes in Caracas was less about military capacity and more a message to the U.S. that it is no longer the sole decision-maker, even in its own backyard.

The Eroding Pillars of US Power

The post-Cold War American supremacy rested on three structural pillars: the global hegemony of the dollar, a massive military capacity and power projection capability blended with technological superiority, and the moral legitimacy granted by the discourse of democracy. Each of these pillars is in decline today; we are facing not a sudden collapse, but a slow and cumulative erosion.

The dollar’s dominance in international transactions continues, but it is no longer unchallenged. Alternative payment mechanisms from BRICS countries and the trade conducted by sanctioned targets like Venezuela through Russia and China demonstrate that financial dependence has become a security risk. Every sanction imposed by the U.S. incentivizes the creation of an economic sphere outside of it.

Washington still possesses an unrivaled power projection capability. However, this capacity has lost its effectiveness due to long wars in the Middle East, commitments in Europe, and internal political divisions. The fact that a single Russian presence in Latin America carries such symbolic weight shows that the psychological foundation of deterrence has eroded.

The discourse of democracy is increasingly perceived as a strategic tool. Interventions not shaped by democratic principles and values abroad, coupled with domestic polarization and the inconsistent application of the liberal order, have weakened Washington’s ideological appeal.

As these three pillars erode simultaneously, the weakening of U.S. influence in Latin America becomes inevitable.

Vacuums, Outcasts, and New Coalitions

In international relations, vacuums do not remain empty for long. Venezuela is a geographical gateway for Russia’s outreach, while Russia is a shield that balances Venezuela’s exclusion from the global system. This relationship is part of a broader trend: as the U.S. tries to preserve the global order with the heavy-handed tools and arrogant hegemonic habits it acquired during the unipolar era, it inadvertently strengthens counter-coalitions. In other words, U.S. punitive policies enable cooperation among its rivals and push even its allies to seek new options.

The Russia-Venezuela rapprochement is just one example of this dynamic. China’s expanding economic networks, the institutionalization of BRICS, the rise of alternative trade corridors… all these developments show that the unipolar order was an exception, and that multipolarity signifies a return to history’s natural state.

Small Signs, Big Consequences

A transport plane landing in Caracas does not, by itself, create a major strategic transformation. However, some symbols in history make the system’s fragile points visible. The harsh reaction from the U.S. reflects not so much the Russian presence in Latin America as it does the erosion of its own hegemonic self-confidence.

If Washington is struggling to manage challenges even in the Western Hemisphere, it shows that not only its global supremacy but the very idea of hegemony is beginning to be questioned.

This erosion will not stop unless the U.S. returns to a realistic assessment and to building alliance systems on a realist foundation. The Russia-Venezuela rapprochement is not a turning point, but a symptom of a deeper transformation. After all, even in our region and beyond, the U.S. is leaving no stone unturned and twisting every arm to fasten its “leash of fealty” [a translation of the Turkish expression biat tasması, implying forced submission] on others, which it calls the “Abraham Accords.” As the world moves back toward a multi-centric order, it is trying to do so with the same heavy-handedness it used in its unipolar days. In the new world order that will emerge from the natural blend of balance and competition, it is highly doubtful how effective this will be.