Why 'The Washington Post' lay-offs matter

Today's edition of
The Washington Post

I learnt about what happened at The Washington Post through a notification on my mobile about Ishaan Tharoor's post on X.

(Ishaan Tharoor is an American journalist who worked for The Time and later for The Washington Post. He is also the son of Shashi Tharoor, a former Indian diplomat who served as the Under-Secretary-General at the UN, and is currently an Indian politician representing the Congress party in the Lower House of Parliament.)

I have been laid off today from the @washingtonpost, along with most of the International staff and so many other wonderful colleagues. I’m heartbroken for our newsroom and especially for the peerless journalists who served the Post internationally — editors and correspondents…

— Ishaan Tharoor (@ishaantharoor) February 4, 2026

Approximately one-third of the newspaper's workforce was laid off. More than 300 journalists in total. The standalone sports section and the Book World section are gone. 

Foreign bureaux across Asia (including the one in New Delhi) and the Middle East are shut. The metro desk, once 40 reporters strong, has been reduced to a dozen. 

The daily flagship news podcast, Post Reports, has been suspended, and deep cuts made to the photography and design departments.

Executive Editor Matt Murray described the move as a "strategic reset" to ensure long-term survival amid falling subscriber numbers and competition from AI-led news aggregation. Shortly after these cuts, on February 8, CEO Will Lewis resigned from the paper. 

Pranshu Verma's last story for The Washington Post 
from New Delhi in the February 3 edition.

JOURNALISTIC HIGHS

Think of The Washington Post, and it's Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein who come to mind. These two young reporters, in the 1970s, began investigating what looked like a minor burglary at the Democratic National Committee headquarters in the Watergate complex.

One lead led to another. They didn't give up. Ably backed by their editor Ben Bradlee and publisher Katharine Graham, the two uncovered a massive conspiracy -- which came to be known as the Watergate Scandal -- that went all the way to the White House. President Richard Nixon had to resign in 1974.

Easily one of the best works in journalism ever. It is all well chronicled in the book All The President's Men, and also in the film by the same name. The book is available on Amazon and the film is available on YouTube.

In fact, the 1970s were the golden years for the Post. Only a few years earlier, it had published, defying government pressure, the Pentagon Papers — a top-secret U.S. Department of Defense report on the Vietnam War. (The New York Times also published them.)

OWNERSHIP CHANGES

Founded in 1877, The Washington Post struggled financially for decades. Then, financier Eugene Meyer purchased it in 1933. Under Meyer and his successors, particularly his daughter Katharine Graham, the Post became a sort of role model for journalists around the world.

For 80 years, the Post was run by the Meyer-Graham family. It prioritised its mission over short-term profits, took risks, and invested in expensive investigations.

Then came the internet and social media in the late 1990s and 2000s, impacting newspapers. They changed entirely the way people consumed news, but more importantly, how much they were willing to pay for it.

With print advertising collapsing and circulation dropping, even the Meyer-Graham family's wealth couldn't insulate the Post from being affected.

In 2013, the family made a momentous decision. They sold The Washington Post to to Nash Holdings, a holding company owned by Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon, for $250 million.

It was sad. But there was some hope. Because Bezos was one of the richest in the world and he understood technology in ways that traditional publishers didn't. Maybe he had the solution on how to make journalism financially viable in the digital age.

That hope wasn't misplaced. The paper invested heavily in digital infrastructure, and it saw an increase in subscriptions.

But that didn't last long. The Post simply couldn't find its way forward in this modern tech-driven media world. Revenes and circulation began to fall.

COST OF RUNNING A NEWSROOM

Quality journalism is very expensive. You need a big team of journalists. They need to be paid their salaries, as well as travel and boarding expenses if they have to go outstation. Maintaining a bureau abroad is even more expensive.

A newsroom needs a big team of copy editors to work on the reporters' copy, correct errors, and fact-check; lawyers to review possible defamatory claims; photographers and videographers; digital teams to work on video and audio, to build and maintain websites, apps, and social media streams.

It is all very cost-intensive.

Now, if there is a layoff, that means fewer journalists will have to handle a bigger volume of work. That means quality declines.

COLLAPSE OF MONOPOLY AND REVENUE MODEL

Those were the days when everyone turned to newspapers for everything — both readers as well as advertisers.

If you wanted to buy a car, sell a house, or find a job, you looked advertisements. If you wanted to know what was happening in your city or the world, you bought a newspaper. Publishers charged advertisers a hefty sum.

The internet completely destroyed this model. Advertisers don't need newspapers. They send their messages directly to their specific target audience for free, or maybe a fraction of the cost.

News too comes free. Why buy a newspaper when you can get news from several newspapers online virtually at no cost?

Social media has only made things worse. Very few people now look for, or read, or listen to news. They just discover it (mainly clickbait stories) on algorithm-powered platforms like Facebook, X, Instagram, YouTube, TikTok, etc. And of course, there are "very credible" WhatsApp forwards from unknown people too!

While these tech companies make money, the actual sources of news (the media organisations) on these platforms get virtually nothing.

Now with artificial intelligence, you don't even click on news links to read a story. The AI reads a vast amount of articles on a particular subject for you and gives you a well-drafted summary! So, now, even the clicks are gone!

In short, the business model that sustained journalism for more than 100 years has simply collapsed.

WORLDWIDE PHENOMENON

The Washington Post isn't the only organisation going through this phase. The Los Angeles Times had multiple rounds of layoffs. NBC News, CBS News, etc., have all reduced their staff.

The Evening Standard in London, a newspaper with almost 200 years of history, in 2024 converted its newspaper from a daily format to a weekly format due to financial constraints, and in the process laid off 150 employees, including many journalists.

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and Radio Canada announced in 2023 that they would eliminate approximately 600 jobs and not fill 200 existing vacancies, because of financial constraints.

It's not just legacy print media. Even digital media organisations are cutting staff. In 2023, BuzzFeed shut down its news division, and Vice Media filed for bankruptcy.

In India too, almost all big media houses have seen layoffs over the past several years.

IT'S NOT ALWAYS ABOUT MONEY

Journalism is not marketing or sales. Work cannot be quantified. It's never about numbers.

This is probably the only industry where the product (the newspaper/magazine) is sold at a price far lower than the cost price.

Most media organisations have always struggled to make ends meet. They survive mostly by cross-subsidising (the profits from a successful product/service are used to offset the losses of another).

WHITHER JOURNALISM?

The reasoning behind the The Washington Post layoffs is that because of shrinking revenues, the Post wants to focus now on fewer areas (mainly Washington and the rest of the US) rather than cover everything around the world.

To be fair, Jeff Bezos has every right to run the paper the way he wants. If he wants to take the Post in a totally different direction, that's entirely his call.

But what is worrying is the broader impact on journalism.

Since anyone with an internet connection can now post any information in the public domain, the definition of news itself seems to have changed. In fact, unverified and sensational information has a higher likelihood of being passed around as news.

Very few people are interested in a balanced and well-rounded coverage of an issue. People want only information that aligns with their own line of thinking. They are lost in the comforts of the echo chamber. Contrarian views are usually rubbished and dismissed contemptuously.

Democracy requires an informed citizenry. When newsrooms shrink, many important news events aren't covered. Even if they do get covered, it is not comprehensive work. The space for informed public debate also shrinks.

Journalism is not public relations. Journalism is about looking at all aspects of an issue. It's about debates covering diverse perspectives. It's about uncomfortable truths. It's the Fourth Estate (the others being the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary).

So where does journalism go from here?

There are no easy answers, because we're in a period of painful transition. One, the old business model is dead and the new model hasn't yet emerged. Two, public relations and sensationalism are increasingly mistaken for journalism.

Media houses are experimenting with different revenue models. One is the subscription model; either the whole website is behind a paywall, or a part of it is. Newspapers and magazines are increasing their cover prices.

Another is having non-profit ownership, wherein there is no pressure on the media house to generate returns for the investors or owners.

There is a lot that the news-reading public can do as well.

One, pay for good journalism. 

Two, never forward or put into the public domain information that is unverified or speculative.

Three, don't just read the headlines and short summary. Read the whole story.

Four, remember the value of journalism — it is too precious to be allowed to die.

Australian Open: Marathon semis to generational final

What a memorable Australian Open it was this year. Four matches — two men’s semi-finals and the two finals — were nothing short of legendary. 

10-SETTER SEMIS

On Friday, 30 January, the two semi-finals lasted a combined 9 hours and 36 minutes — a new record for the Australian Open and the third longest in Grand Slam history.

In the first, Carlos Alcaraz beat Alexander Zverev in a grueling five-set battle: 6-4, 7-6(5), 6-7(3), 6-7(4), 7-5. It lasted 5 hours and 27 minutes. 

By the time Novak Djokovic beat Jannik Sinner 3-6, 6-3, 4-6, 6-4, 6-4, it was nearly 1:30 am! The midnight madness, as they call it!

Both matches were "touch and go," with contests so even that it felt unfair someone had to lose. Interestingly, this year’s semi-finals saw both last year’s winner (Sinner) and the runner-up (Zverev) knocked out.

COMPOSURE VS FURY

On Saturday, 31 January, Elena Rybakina won her second Slam by defeating the favourite, Aryna Sabalenka, 6-4, 4-6, 6-4.

From the start, Sabalenka lacked her usual confidence, while Rybakina remained her signature "ice-cool" self. Though Sabalenka showed flashes of brilliance to take the second set, she lost her grip in the third set. Even after leading 3-0 in the decider, the tide turned abruptly. Rybakina clawed her way back to seal a remarkable victory.

A GENERATIONAL BATTLE

Yesterday’s final was a true "clash of the ages": Djokovic at 38 versus Alcaraz at just 22. 

To put that in perspective, when Djokovic made his Grand Slam debut in Melbourne in 2005, Alcaraz was a mere two-year-old!

While Alcaraz was the favourite, I had stuck my neck out for Djokovic. Having played 10 Australian Open finals and lost none, and having come this far this year, I thought he would pull it off!

The match was pure entertainment. Djokovic dominated the first set 6-2, but then from the second set onwards Alcaraz waved his magic wand. 

Djokovic began to struggle with unforced errors, while Alcaraz’s winners were extraordinary. He was hitting spots with incredible class. 

Djokovic lost the second set and the third. I thought, the loss of the third pretty much sealed his fate. Because, he would have had to win the fourth and the fifth, and I wondered if he had in him to last another five-setter so soon after his semi-final marathon.

ALCARAZ SETTLES IT

In the fourth, Djokovic seemed to have regained energy, and until Game 11, they were going neck and neck, with the score at 5-6.

In Game 12, serving to stay in the set, and force a tie-break, Djokovic finally faltered. Alcaraz wrapped it up at 7-5.

NEW RECORDS

With this victory, Alcaraz became the youngest man in history to complete a Career Grand Slam at 22 years and 272 days, surpassing American Don Budge’s 1938 record. (Budge, incidentally, was the first player ever to win all four Slams in a single calendar year).

Djokovic received a standing ovation. Even in defeat, he set a record. At 38 years and 255 days, he became the oldest man to reach the final of Australian Open.

While it’s uncertain if Djokovic will ever get this close to winning a Slam, he is not a man who gives up easily. However, what we saw at Melbourne Park yesterday was, in every sense, like the passing of the baton.

Kudos to Djokovic for putting up a tough fight, and making the final worth watching!

MORE THAN ABOUT CHAMPIONS

This Australian Open will be remembered not just for its champions, but for its endurance, emotion, and symbolism. 

From record-setting semifinal marathons to a women’s final decided by nerve and resilience, and a men’s final that felt like a generational handover, Melbourne Park gave tennis fans everything.

(All images: courtesy https://ausopen.com/)

Mark Tully: The voice that defined India

Photo courtesy: BBC/Getty Images

The news of Mark Tully’s passing in Delhi yesterday feels like the end of an era. For me, he was among the earliest voices on the radio that I remember. My fascination with the radio began in my school days in the mid-1970s, and back then, the day always started with the BBC.

At 7.15 am was the 15-minute South Asia Special, which provided a detailed look at regional events, especially in India. It was followed at 7.30 am by the nine-minute top-of-the-hour news bulletin (India is five and a half hours ahead of GMT). Then came the six-minute British Press Review, and at 7.45 am was the Radio News Reel featuring dispatches from BBC correspondents worldwide.

(Now, there is no Radio News Reel; the correspondents’ reports are merged into longer news-based programmes. There is no South Asia Special either. I doubt if there is a press review.)

At 8 am, we would switch to the Hindi news bulletin and then the English news at 8.10 am on All India Radio. (Now AIR is known as Akashvani and those morning news bulletins are of 15-minute duration.)

AN INDIAN AT HEART

The BBC was not just a window to the world. Mark Tully’s reports gave a well-rounded perspective to events in India too, which the news on AIR, the government broadcaster, lacked. 

Interestingly, Tully didn't even start as a reporter; he joined the BBC in 1965 as an administrative assistant. He gradually worked his way up to become the most recognisable voice of India to the rest of the world. 

Mark Tully was never just a Western broadcaster stationed in India. He understood the soul of this country; not surprising, considering that he was born in Kolkata (then Calcutta). His mother too was born in Bengal, and her family had deep roots in the country as administrators and traders for generations.

Tully never saw India through the stereotypical lens of "a land of snake-charmers and rope tricks." He was able to understand the historical and cultural contexts to many socio-political developments here, and so his reportage often sounded quite different. He also turned down relocation to other countries and to BBC’s London studio, and he preferred to make India his permanent home.

"TULLY SAHIB"

Mark Tully’s style of narration was unique, perhaps a bit atypical for a broadcaster, but it was his in-depth knowledge that won people over. His fluency in Hindi gave him access to the small towns and villages that other foreign reporters couldn't reach, endearing him to common people who affectionately called him "Tully Sahib” (Tully Sir.)

He has written a few books. The most well-known are: Amritsar: Mrs Gandhi's Last Battle (1985), co-authored with his colleague Satish Jacob, on the events leading up to the storming of the Golden Temple in Amritsar; and No Full Stops in India (1988), a collection of essays. They are essential reading for anyone trying to understand the socio-political fabric of the country.

PERSONAL ENCOUNTER

I was a big fan of Mark Tully right from my school days, and he played no small role in shaping my interest in journalism. So, it was a heartbreak when it was announced in 1994 that he was resigning from the BBC in protest against the corporate structures and procedures that the broadcaster began adopting.

In October 2010, Tully was in Bengaluru to deliver a lecture on religious pluralism, and I was fortunate enough to be granted an interview with him. I am searching my home for the photographs I had taken and the full recording of the interview; however, the memory remains vivid. Here is the clipping.

In 2019, in an interview at the 8th Odisha Literary Festival, he recalled several fascinating anecdotes, from receiving threats to being locked in a room by mobs in Ayodhya while covering the demolition of the Babri Masjid. He also spoke about topics like government censorship, and secularism. Here is the full interview:

THE FINAL DISPATCH

“... Mark Tully, BBC, Delhi.”

That’s how he ended his dispatches from the national capital. For generations of listeners, that sign-off was a guarantee of professionalism, truth, and empathy. While he may be gone, those words, and that voice, will ring in our ears forever.

Rest in Peace, Tully Sahib.

(Useful reading: BBC in India - How the end of the Empire led to a new relationship with India)

Six World Cups this blockbuster sports year

If you are a sports fan, then 2026 is your year! A massive lineup of major events is scheduled for this year.

I’m not just talking about the annual fixtures we’ve come to expect, like tennis Grand Slams or the premier football and cricket leagues. 

What makes 2026 truly special is the sheer number of biennial and quadrennial international championships, including an impressive six World Cups.

Interestingly, we are seeing a new trend in major athletics: both the Commonwealth Games and the Asian Games are making significant efforts to cut costs. 

Japan will house Asiad athletes on a cruise ship and hotels instead of the traditional 'games village'. This just shows how expensive hosting these "grand gala" events has become.

QUADRENNIAL EVENTS

Here are the events that are held once in four years: three World Cups (one in football and two in hockey), and two athletic events (Commonwealth Games and Asian Games).

FIFA World Cup (Men’s Football)

The football world will descend upon the US, Canada, and Mexico from June 11 to July 19. Matches will be played in 16 cities across three nations, though the majority will be held in the US. The grand final is set for July 19 at the MetLife Stadium in the New York/New Jersey area.

Hockey World Cups (Men & Women)

In a rare move, the Men's and Women's Hockey World Cups will be held simultaneously in Belgium and the Netherlands from August 14 to 30. This is only the third time in history both tournaments are staged together; the previous instances were both in the Netherlands, in Utrecht in 1998, and The Hague in 2014. 

Commonwealth Games

Glasgow, Scotland, will host the Games from July 23 to August 2. Glasgow stepped in as a replacement after the Australian state of Victoria withdrew due to escalating costs. To keep the event sustainable, this will be a scaled-down version using existing venues, with no new athletes’ village being built.

Asian Games

The Asiad will be hosted by the Aichi Prefecture and the city of Nagoya, Japan, from September 19 to October 4. The Games will feature 41 sports across more than 60 disciplines.

This event is also economising: instead of a permanent village, a cruise ship docked at Nagoya's Kinjo Pier will house roughly 5,000 athletes, while others will stay in hotels or temporary "container-based" villas.

BIENNIAL EVENTS

Several events that are held once in two years will take place in 2026. Again, there will be three World Cup events, all in cricket.

Under-19 Cricket World Cup

This is currently underway in Zimbabwe and Namibia (Jan 15 – Feb 6). Australia is the defending champion, but all eyes are on India, who have won five out of the 15 editions held so far since the inaugural one in 1988. India won in 2000, 2008, 2012, 2018, and 2022.

Men's T20 World Cup

Co-hosted by India and Sri Lanka from February 7 to March 8, matches will be spread across eight venues. 

The final is slated for Ahmedabad or Colombo, and semifinals will be in Kolkata and Mumbai. Colombo is an alternative venue for semifinal too. 

The Sri Lanka option has been provided so that if Pakistan qualifies, the match will be held in Colombo, since Pakistan team can't play in India.

Women’s T20 World Cup

England and Wales will host this tournament from June 12 to July 5, featuring an expanded field of 12 teams for the first time. The final will be held at the historic Lord's Cricket Ground in London.

Thomas and Uber Cup (Badminton)

These prestigious team championships for men (Thomas) and women (Uber) will take place in Horsens, Denmark, from April 24 to May 3. This will be the second time Denmark is hosting the combined event. The 2021 championships was in Aarhus.

World Team Table Tennis Championships

Coming to London from April 28 to May 10, this event marks the centenary of the very first World Championships held in London in 1926. With 64 men’s and 64 women’s teams from every continent, it is expected to be the biggest table tennis World Championship ever held.

The individual championships are held in every odd year, and the team championships are held in every even year.

THE ROAD AHEAD

While I have focused on these major tournaments, the calendar is also filled with international weightlifting and shooting championships, besides many others; and of course, the tennis Grand Slams and European and South American football.

It is truly a non-stop schedule. By the time one trophy is lifted, it will already be time for the next opening ceremony!

A Sunday surprise

AI-generated representative image.

Yesterday, my cousin, her husband, and a friend were arriving in Bengaluru from Coimbatore on the Vande Bharat Express. I had planned to pick them up from the Cantonment Railway Station, the train's final stop. Its scheduled arrival time is 1:45 pm.

I was in two minds about whether to drive or take a cab. That's because the station is currently undergoing a ₹480-crore ($53 million) redevelopment, and the area is a bit of a mess. Barricades and construction have reduced the road width. While the station did have ample parking space, much of it has now been taken over by the ongoing work.

A MESSAGE IN WHATSAPP GROUPS 

It's been a very long time since I had been to that side of the city, and I wasn’t quite sure if any alternative area had been provided for parking. So, in the hope of getting some update from anyone who would have gone there recently, I dropped a message in a couple of WhatsApp groups — my apartment residents’ group and my Bengaluru-based school alumni group.

The updates and suggestions were consistent: the area is extremely crowded and there is very less space for parking. Everyone advised me to leave the car at home and take an autorickshaw or a cab.

However, one message in the school alumni group stood out. It was from someone I’ll call SN, who wrote: 

I am on the same train. I’ll guide your cousin and her family to the exit. Arrive by around 1:30 pm. That way you can just pick them up and go without needing to park. I’ll take care of them.

That a schoolmate of mine was on the very same train was a big coincidence, and his immediate offer of help was a wonderful surprise!

Frankly, I didn’t know SN. From his messages addressing me as ‘Pradeep Sir’, I presumed he was a junior in school. (It’s a general custom for the alumni to address their seniors as Sir, a tradition carried over from our school days.)

As the conversation on the WhatsApp continued, another schoolmate, PS (eight years my junior, whom I did know), joined the chat. From the messages, I figured out that SN works for the Railways and was from the Batch of 2001 — making him a good 19 years my junior. We had never met nor spoken before.

SN asked for my cousin’s coach number and he was kind enough to go over and introduce himself. He explained the "Sainik School connection" and told them that in case they needed any assistance, he was around. 

My cousin, her husband, and her friend were not only pleasantly surprised but deeply impressed that a total "stranger" would reach out simply because of a shared alma mater! (I hadn't sought any help. I was only checking the parking facilities at the railway station!)

AT THE RAILWAY STATION

Meanwhile, from the NTES (National Train Enquiry Service) app, I got to know that the train would arrive around 35 minutes ahead of schedule, something that is fairly common for premier trains like Vande Bharat. When I told my wife about about these unexpected developments, she was so touched that she decided to come along just to meet the kind soul that SN clearly was.

Though SN had suggested he would guide my guests to the exit and I could just come in my car and pick them up without parking, my wife and I decided against it. That's because we wanted to meet SN, and personally thank him for his proactive involvement. That would have needed us to park the car, which might not have been possible.

Instead, we reached the station by autorickshaw. In about a couple minutes, the train pulled in. As soon as my cousin alighted, the first thing she mentioned was how cordial and considerate SN had been. I smiled and told her, "That’s what we call the famed ‘Kazhak’ bonding." (Kazhak is short for Kazhakootam, the small town where our school is located).

MORE SURPRISES

In a few minutes, SN joined us, and we got talking. But the surprises weren't over — PS showed up at the station too! Obviously, he couldn't resist being part of this "micro-mini get-together." As we stood there chatting, we discovered even more connections; it turned out that PS and my cousin's friend shared a lot of common ground!

As we were talking, SN’s phone rang. It was a member of the railway staff asking if one of his friends had lost their mobile phone on the train. SN turned to my cousin and asked if she had her phone. She quickly checked her bag and realised with a shock that she had left it behind on her seat!

The staff had seen SN speaking with them earlier and presumed he would know the phone's owner. What luck! The mobile was duly returned, leaving my cousin immensely grateful, not just to SN, but for the entire series of events that led to their meeting.

It was an incredibly eventful Sunday morning. And, it all started with a simple question about parking!

Panama 2.0 or something new? Might vs right in US capture of Venezuela's Maduro

An American administration toppling a government it doesn’t like is nothing new. They have a long history of it, stretching back decades.

However, what happened on 3 January in Venezuela was unprecedented in one aspect: specifically in the dramatic manner in which the US executed "Operation Absolute Resolve".

When I mentioned to some friends that this was a first of its kind, a few argued it wasn’t. They pointed to the case of Manuel Noriega in Panama in the late 1980s as a precedent.

PANAMA WAS DIFFERENT

While there are similarities, they are actually quite limited. General Manuel Noriega wasn’t captured in the same way Nicolás Maduro was. 

Since many people have been talking about Panama, let me recall what happened. It was in December 1989.

Just like Maduro, Noriega was wanted by the US on drug-trafficking charges. Noriega had actually been a "friend" of the US initially, but the relationship snapped. One major reason being the murder of Hugo Spadafora, a prominent physician and guerrilla fighter, by Noriega’s government.

Just as Trump tried to negotiate a deal with Maduro, Ronald Reagan’s administration had tried to force Noriega to resign; but it failed. Noriega was widely believed to have lost the May 1989 elections. He annulled it. The US, under the presidency of George H.W. Bush, began amassing troops and invaded Panama on 20 December 1989.

And here is the difference: though the Panamanian forces were no match for the US, the fighting lasted for days. 

Noriega went into hiding, took refuge in Apostolic Nunciature, the de facto embassy of the Vatican, and successfully evaded capture for a while.

The US troops surrounded the diplomatic enclave, and launched psychological warfare that included blaring deafening rock music. Parallely, the US mounted pressure on the Vatican.  

On 3 January 1990 (that is, two full weeks after the invasion began) Noriega realised the game was up and surrendered. He was flown to the US, imprisoned, tried, convicted, and sentenced to 40 years.

THE LIGHTNING STRIKE

Unlike the Panamanian invasion, what happened in Venezuela was a "lightning strike" by the US Delta Force. US cyber-operators even plunged the capital, Caracas, into total darkness before troops swooped in on Maduro. 

They captured him and his wife (the precise word used by President Trump in his presser) and flew them out of the country to the USS Iwo Jima, and from there, straight to New York.

WILL THIS TRIGGER COPY-CAT RAIDS? 

Experts are now concerned that this new precedent set by Donald Trump could lead to similar copy-cat raids by powerful nations looking to decapitate the governments of weaker countries.

Some suggest China could attempt this with Taiwan. One of my friends even wondered: what if India did something similar in Bangladesh?

Theoretically, these are all possibilities. Weaker leaders will certainly feel vulnerable after watching the events in Venezuela. 

However, on a practical level, the realities on the ground are very different. In Venezuela’s case, while drug-trafficking was the public trigger, President Trump, during the press conference, spoke quite openly about the country's vast oil reserves being at the heart of the operation.

Furthermore, Venezuela and Taiwan are in no way comparable. Similarly, the dynamics of the India-Bangladesh relationship are very different from that of the US-Venezuela situation.

LIFE GOES ON

Barring the terrifying swiftness with which the US overran a sovereign nation, nothing much has changed in the grander scheme of things. 

This is not the first time international law has been violated. The US has done it many times before: in Iraq, Libya, and Grenada, just to cite a few. Each time, there are vociferous protests, not just in the US, but across the world, but eventually, the dust settles.

Russia, and earlier, the USSR, too have a similar track record in places like Crimea, Ukraine, Georgia, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, etc. Again, the world protests, but nothing really happens.

SO, INVASION IS OKAY?

Just because something has been happening for several decades doesn't make it right. What the superpowers are doing is certainly not okay. I am just portraying the reality of our world. 

Might might not be right, but the mighty usually get away with what they want.