The Immature Tyrants
On the 3rd of January 2026, the United States, through its military operations, seized the elected president of a sovereign nation, Venezuela—Nicolás Maduro—together with his wife, Cilia Flores, in the capital city of Caracas, during the night, inside their own residence. They were dressed in prisoners’ garments, chained and shackled, and taken to New York City in the United States.
President Maduro is ostensibly accused of drug trafficking and is to be tried in New York; yet the truth is that Venezuela’s oil has become a curse upon him. Venezuela possesses 18% of the world’s oil reserves, 80% of which are held by China. From this oil, China provides 20% to Russia. President Maduro did not walk in step with the village chief—the United States—and this was his fate.
Now all the oil of Venezuela has fallen into American hands, and the rich morsel has been taken from China’s mouth. For several years, the United States will extract all of Venezuela’s oil under the pretext of recovering the costs of that night’s military operation.
European countries, which repeatedly invoke freedom and respect for human rights, did not condemn this American assault. As for the Islamic world, it is not even considered a competitor. How frightened, one wonders, must the oil-rich rulers of the Gulf states have been?
Thirty-six years ago (December 1989), the leader of Panama, Manuel Noriega, was similarly arrested by the US on charges of drug trafficking and taken prisoner to the United States. Panama occupies a highly strategic position: via the Panama Canal, the Atlantic Ocean is connected to the Pacific Ocean, one of the world's most important commercial maritime routes.
The United States sought control of this strategic canal, but President Noriega refused. His fate, too, was the same as that of Venezuela’s Maduro.
Such actions were once carried out by the Russians, the French, the British, and other European powers. Before them, Timur, Genghis, Alexander, and many others—differing only in degree—did the same. From the time of Adam until today, this has been the social and political behavior of certain human beings.
In general, humanity tends toward the law of the jungle, in which the share of the strong is maximised. The lion is king of the jungle because it possesses stronger paws, sharper claws, and larger fangs than other animals. Prophets, peace be upon them, and good people come to bring balance to such an unequal society and to guide humanity onto the path of true humaneness.
Yet over time, the teachings of the prophets and the good are forgotten or distorted, and society once again reverts to the law of the jungle, where power rules.
When I reflect on Maduro, Noriega, and similar historical episodes, I am reminded of the childhood games of my village and town. The nature of children’s games is such that the strong child takes by force whatever he desires from the others; the weak child merely cries.
The other children do not join hands against the strong oppressor; rather, they accept the situation and even play alongside him in good spirits. Because children are not yet mature, they do not understand the concepts of justice, law, and responsibility; they quickly submit to coercion. For self-protection, they usually do not oppose the strong child but instead befriend him.
Thus, everything goes to the strong child; the weak child can do nothing but bargain with tears. The other children remain silent or stand beside the strong one. They do not side with the oppressed child against the oppressor because they are afraid and believe that if they raise their voices today, tomorrow it will be their turn.
Their intellect is not yet mature enough to realize that if they unite, they would be stronger than the aggressor, and he would no longer be able to oppress them. Each child thinks that by befriending the strong one, he will remain safe from harm.
Yet the strong child does not operate by this logic. If, even an hour later, he sees something desirable in the possession of that same friend, he will seize it by force, and the other children will again merely watch.
In this way, domination and mutual subjugation are accepted among children as a natural condition, and they consider it normal. Even yesterday’s tears seem ordinary to them today, and they once again play with yesterday’s oppressor.
Children are so simple, and their forgetfulness so great, because they have not yet matured and their intellect has not fully developed.
This same example is now visible among adults, societies, and states. The strong child is the powerful country; the weak child is the weak country; the frightened, silent child is the fearful populace; and the silent children are neutral, silent states. The friends of the strong child are the allies of the powerful country.
The crying of the weak child is the complaint petition submitted to the United Nations, through which the weak country pleads its case, yet gains nothing.
Just as there is no law among children except the law of force, so too the international order has been constructed by powerful countries and imposed upon others. Like children, some states witness oppression but do not oppose it; indeed, they even support the oppressor.
In 2001, the powerful child—the United States—attacked the weak child—Afghanistan—and claimed that the Taliban government was allied with terrorists and therefore had to be overthrown. After the fall of the Taliban government, to justify the continued American presence in Afghanistan, the Taliban were labelled terrorists and killed daily.
The near and distant immature neighbours of Afghanistan—and even some immature Afghans—became the US allies, though only yesterday these Afghans, under the Soviet rule, were chanting slogans against the United States, calling it bloodthirsty imperialism, and killing people merely for listening to the BBC or studying in the USA.
But when the policy of the strong power changed, all those immature actors who once called the Taliban terrorists now sit with them and engage with them.
Just as the weak child fears the attack of the strong child, so too do weak nations fear the military assault, economic pressure, and political and diplomatic isolation imposed by powerful states. Just as children think, weak countries also think that if they remain silent and neutral, they will be safe.
The United States launched an unjust attack on Iraq under a false pretext. The US was the strong child; Iraq was the weak child. No one stood beside Iraq against the US aggression. Some stood with the United States, and others remained neutral. The recent action of the US against Venezuela follows the same pattern and proportion.
The United States is a leading nation in the life sciences, whereas Venezuela lags in scientific knowledge. Knowledge is power; ignorance is weakness and humiliation.
The question is: Can this condition be changed?
Yes—when we become knowledgeable, conscious, and mature.
And how may maturity be attained?
Once, the large and powerful child—the Soviet Union—attacked the weak child, Afghanistan, in 1979. Yet the weak child stood firm and seized the strong one by the throat. For a time, the other children merely watched to see what would happen. But when they became certain that the weak child was fighting with strong morale and firm resolve, the other children grew courageous and entered the struggle in his support.
True, they could not confront the powerful child head-on, but they struck him from every vulnerable side. That war endured for a long time. The longer it lasted, the more the prestige and awe of the strong child deteriorated. Even the neutral, silent, and observing children turned against him. Day by day, the opposing children became bolder and pressed him harder.
His own allied children no longer found the heart to continue their companionship. At last, the strong child grew weary and despondent and withdrew from the field with head down.
Such is the fate of colonial powers and tyrannical regimes—and of the nations subjected to their rule. Some sit helplessly beneath oppression, weeping; others rise to fight and carry the field.
Yet there exists another path to change—more effective and freer of bloodshed: to change the form and rules of the game. If children attend schools and madrasas and are guided by capable teachers, they learn the order and discipline of play.
Instead of force and chaos, they play by rules, so conflict does not arise. If a dispute arises among them during the game, the teacher, standing in the field as a judge, resolves it justly. Observe football, volleyball, and cricket: they proceed calmly and in orderly fashion.
Children gradually become accustomed to such disciplined games. Even if the teacher-judge is absent, they appoint a referee from among them to ensure fairness, thereby preventing violence in play. And should a child refuse to accept the referee’s decision, the others—having received civic and moral training—rebuke the rebellious child.
Here, education, law, rules, awareness, and unity shape many aspects of the children’s play and lives. Consider this well: nature shows the child the existence of strength and power and its influence in daily life, but education and knowledge teach the child the limits of power—how strength must be exercised within boundaries.
They learn legitimate and proper means of employing their strength to achieve the goal. If children are left to themselves, force becomes sovereign; they grow accustomed to brutality, humiliation, tears, and a life governed by domination and disgrace.
But if they are granted education and knowledge, they live with dignity beneath the shade of justice. For this reason, colonial powers oppose the education and awareness of weaker nations. Also, despotic governments resent the enlightenment of their own peoples.
Under various pretexts, they obstruct knowledge and learning, seeking instead to subjugate society through force, to threaten it with fear, and to mislead it with superstition. They desire society to remain immature—its minds undeveloped, its understanding shallow—so that life may remain, like children’s games, subject to brute force.
Immature rulers wish to govern nations through coercion, ignorance, and lawlessness. Rule by force is, in truth, the rule of the immature—or of children—who intimidate, imprison, and kill others to preserve their own power.
We must learn from the case of Maduro: why is the US so audacious, and why is Venezuela so helpless that its sitting, elected president and his wife were abducted from their beds in the night?
So take warning, O people of understanding.