How US-led regime change reshaped nations

The United States’ influence over international politics has long extended beyond diplomacy and trade, often taking the form of direct and indirect interventions to reshape governments abroad.

From covert intelligence operations to full-scale military campaigns, U.S.-led regime changes have had profound human, economic, and political consequences, leaving states weakened and societies divided. Today, the debate over U.S. actions in Venezuela has renewed scrutiny of this historic pattern.

In the latest episode of On My Radar, Kamran Khan examined the long history of U.S.-led regime change, citing Venezuela as the current focal point. He highlighted discussions surrounding the possible trial in New York of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and Washington’s broader attempts to influence the country’s political trajectory.

Khan noted that U.S. interventions, whether overt or covert, have been a consistent feature of foreign policy since World War II, aiming to align other nations with U.S. political, economic, or security interests.

Khan traced this history across multiple continents. From Iran in 1953, where Operation Ajax orchestrated the overthrow of Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh to control oil resources, to Latin America, where the U.S. backed coups in Guatemala (1954), Brazil (1964), Chile (1973), and Panama (1989), these operations relied on a combination of CIA support, proxy forces, and political pressure.

In many cases, interventions were justified in the name of democracy, anti-communism, counter-terrorism, or international peace, but the outcomes often included widespread destruction, loss of life, and fragile political systems.

Asia also witnessed major interventions. In Indonesia (1965), the U.S. supported the rise of General Suharto amid fears of communist influence, resulting in thousands of deaths. In Afghanistan, the post-9/11 war aimed at toppling the Taliban and combating terrorism led to over 170,000 deaths, displacement of millions, and the emergence of a generation raised amid conflict.

Despite two decades of military presence and reconstruction efforts, the Taliban regained power within weeks of the U.S. withdrawal, illustrating the limits of externally imposed regime change.

Iraq’s 2003 invasion, framed around oil and alleged weapons of mass destruction, left the country’s infrastructure devastated, services disrupted, and contributed to the rise of ISIS. Similarly, NATO’s 2011 intervention in Libya toppled Muammar Gaddafi but created political fragmentation, civilian casualties, and a weakened state where armed groups-controlled oil resources.

In Syria, U.S.-backed opposition under CIA Operation Timber Sycamore contributed to regime destabilization, ultimately reshaping alliances and elevating former adversaries into partners.

Khan emphasized that regime change was rarely achieved by the U.S. alone. Local political and military actors often played key roles in facilitating these outcomes, effectively acting as covert allies.

While these operations succeeded in toppling governments, they consistently led to human suffering, societal division, and weak state structures. New governments, regardless of ideology, frequently remained reliant on external support, reflecting a recurring pattern in U.S. foreign policy.

Economic pressure has also been a key tool. Iran, for example, has faced prolonged U.S.-led sanctions, resulting in economic collapse, hyperinflation, and public unrest, illustrating that interventions extend beyond military means.

Meanwhile, strategic interests continue to shape U.S. ambitions, as seen in recent attempts to influence Greenland, a politically autonomous region under Denmark, and warnings to anti-U.S. governments in Mexico, Colombia and Cuba.

Khan concluded that while the tactics and contexts have varied, the strategic consequences of U.S.-led regime change have remained largely consistent: massive human and financial costs, weakened states, and enduring societal division.

He noted that these interventions, while effective in achieving short-term goals, have repeatedly undermined U.S. moral authority and imposed heavy financial burdens on American taxpayers. The story of Venezuela, in this context, is just the latest chapter in a seven-decade history of U.S. influence and intervention worldwide.