Politics Beyond the Water’s Edge: Iraq 2003 and Venezuela 2026.

For populist politicians, politics extends beyond the water’s edge. A growing body of the literature suggests that populist leaders rely on foreign policy means to attain domestic goals. This article aims to answer the following question: How do populist-led governments use foreign policy as a resource to combat their domestic opponents? I argue that the concept of ‘politicisation of foreign policy’ can shed light on the entangled relationship between domestic politics and foreign policy under populist executives. I define politicisation ‘as the process by which a political actor promotes awareness of, mobilises with, and contests alternatives to his or her foreign policy course in domestic politics by deliberately framing those foreign policy issues in anti-elitist and people-centric terms’ (Destradi, Plagemann, Taş; 2022, p. 479). To do so, I conduct a most similar case study exploring two US military interventions: Iraq in 2003 and Venezuela in 2026. Both attacks were carried out by Republican administrations and lack a solid legal base according to international law. In addition, according to the literature and public statements, the quest for natural resources seems to be a key driver in both cases. Yet the arguments wielded by both executives differ sharply. This article conducts a qualitative content analysis of George W. Bush and Donald Trump’s institutional communication in the immediate aftermath of the military operations. I have found that, Trump has used the capture of Maduro to mobilise public support against his domestic opponents and promote domestic narratives that are electorally profitable for him (Mobilisation). Furthermore, Donald Trump aimed to elevate his domestic stance by highlighting foreign policy cleavages between him and the previous president Joe Biden (Contestation). This article contributes to the enlarging literature on populism and foreign policy and the relationship between domestic and international drivers in foreign policy making. Although there is very relevant progress in the field of populist foreign policy and politicisation (see Destradi et al., 2022; Cadier, 2024), the concept has not been yet applied to case studies dealing with military operations, which are known for mobilising domestic support (rally round the flag effect) and to divert the public attention from domestic politics. By conducing this case study, I aim to find different strategies of foreign policy diversion between populist and non-populist governments. Recognising populists’ patterns of politicisation in military operations can shed light on the discursive and rhetorical resources that they use to attack the domestic opposition, potentially leading to democratic backsliding through foreign policy means.