Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond
From Venezuela and made by Venezuelan Chavistas
US President Trump, CIA Director John Ratcliffe (left) and Secretary of State Marco Rubio (right) monitor US military attacks on Venezuela, from Trump's Mar-a-Lago, Palm Beach, Florida on Saturday, Jan. 3, 2026. Photo: Molly Riley/The White House via Getty Images.
By Jiang Shixue – Feb 6, 2026
If one phrase can be applied to summarize the characteristics of US foreign policy, it should be “Coercive diplomacy”.
What is coercive diplomacy? Different people have different definitions. But the basic meaning is simple: It is a type of diplomacy plus muscle. In other words, coercive diplomacy cloaks itself in diplomatic garb and relies on one’s military or economic power to force other countries to submit.
As the world’s sole superpower, the United States often engages in coercive diplomacy against any country at any time. The methods of coercion are varied and numerous. Even countries maintaining close relations with the US sometimes become targets of its coercive diplomacy. For instance, on April 25, 2021, the Danish newspaper Politiken revealed that the US Embassy in Denmark had contacted the paper, demanding it prove it did not use technical equipment such as routers or modems provided by Chinese companies including Huawei, ZTE, Hytera, Hikvision, and Dahua Technology. Otherwise, the embassy might cancel its subscription. This shows that even subscribing to a newspaper can become leverage for US coercive diplomacy.
In his second term, President Trump increasingly integrates tariffs with coercive diplomacy. It wields tariffs not merely as tools for economic protection but also as primary instruments of coercive diplomacy even against his European countries.
Those which are seen as “enemies”, “adversaries” or “competitors” by the US have long been victims of US coercive diplomacy, with Cuba being one of the most prominent examples.
In February 1962, the United States began a comprehensive economic blockade, referred to by the US as a trade embargo, against Cuba. These sanctions have continued to this day, becoming the longest-lasting sanctions imposed by a major power on a weak country in modern international relations history, despite the UN General Assembly having passed many resolutions demanding the US lift its sanctions on Cuba.
Recently, in a surprising ruling, Panama’s Supreme Court has declared the concession awarded to a Hong Kong-based company for the operation of key ports along the Panama Canal unconstitutional. This decision has sent shockwaves to China and other countries that have economic relations with Latin America. Earlier, Panama withdrew from its participation in China’s Belt-Road Initiative. There is no doubt that the US coercive diplomacy is behind Panama.
Needless to say, the kidnapping of President Maduro of Venezuela is not only an act of coercive diplomacy, but also a military invasion against a sovereign nation.
Recently, President Trump has once again revived his ambition to acquire Greenland with a sharper, more coercive tone. As many commentators have pointed out, although he has just backed off on using force, coercion without military invasion would still generate the erosion of international law. Until now it is unclear whether his coercive diplomacy will succeed or not.
Venezuela’s Automotive Market Surges as New Car Sales Grow 120% in 2025, China Leads the Trend
A commentary by Daniel Larison, editor of The American Conservative magazine, is quite insightful. He argues that the Trump administration’s coercive diplomacy is no diplomacy at all, but a series of insults, sanctions, tariffs, and threats that achieve nothing except to cause disruption and pain. AP journalist Matthew Lee just simply calls it “the diplomacy of coercion.”
In vivid contrast, China has put forward the notion of building a community of shared future for mankind. In order to realize this dream, the international community must do away with coercive diplomacy.
Chinese culture advocates “do not do unto others what you would not have them do unto you.” China has never possessed a gene for hegemony or an impulse for expansion and has never coerced any country. In the face of external interference, China’s actions constitute legitimate and lawful countermeasures aimed at defending the nation’s rightful interests and upholding international fairness and justice. China has never gone to others’ doorsteps to stir up trouble, never reached its hands into others’ homes, and certainly never occupied an inch of foreign territory. The invention, patent, and intellectual property rights of coercive diplomacy indisputably belong to the United States, which flagrantly engages in unilateral sanctions, long-arm jurisdiction, and interference in internal affairs. The US claim of “dealing with other countries from a position of strength” or “peace through strength” is, in essence, about bullying the weak with one’s military power.
Apparently, the planet where we live needs a community of shared future for mankind, not coercive diplomacy or “the diplomacy of coercion.”
Jiang Shixue is Senior Research Fellow of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. He is also Distinguished Professor at Shanghai University, Macau University of Science and Technology, Hangzhou Normal University, and Sichuan International Studies University.
JS/OT
