With the capture of Venezuela's Nicolás Maduro, President Donald Trump and his allies hailed the audacious military operation as a significant triumph. Trump demonstrated willingness to utilize U.S. forces for high-risk missions that could yield substantial rewards. The operation aimed to dethrone a leader labeled by Trump’s administration as an "illegitimate" dictator and a "narco-terrorist," whose regime has been accused of facilitating the flow of illegal drugs into the U.S. and Europe.
Shortly after U.S. forces had departed Venezuelan airspace, Trump described the operation as “brilliant” during an interview with The New York Times, noting that while some U.S. troops sustained injuries, there were no fatalities. However, the consequences of removing Maduro raise multiple complex questions for the White House. Who will step into the power vacuum left by Maduro? How can stability be achieved in a nation that has suffered extensive hyperinflation, food and medicine shortages, and significant emigration despite abundant oil resources?
The implications of Trump’s show of American strength in the region are considerable, particularly concerning global adversaries like China and Russia. Trump’s decision to target Maduro reinforces U.S. military authority in its influence zones, just as Xi Jinping threatens Taiwan and Vladimir Putin pursues territorial ambitions in Ukraine. This military operation signifies a pivotal moment in Trump’s foreign policy during his second term, where he is now more inclined to deploy U.S. military force despite his previous commitments to avoid conflict.
Experts, including retired Navy Rear Adm. Mark Montgomery, warn that the situation in Venezuela could present greater challenges for Trump than his actions in Iran earlier. Unlike the clear-cut response following the Iran airstrikes, the aftermath of Maduro’s removal lacks clarity and direction. European allies had previously expressed unease regarding the military buildup in the Caribbean, where Trump ordered numerous strikes on suspected drug traffickers, many of whom were allegedly connected to Maduro’s regime.
Although Maduro was widely regarded as a controversial leader with elections marred by irregularities in 2018 and 2024, reactions from the global community to his removal have been mixed. Several European leaders expressed wariness about the U.S. military operation, voicing concerns about violations of international law and the principle of non-use of force. Criticism from U.S. Democrats was swift, with Arizona Senator Ruben Gallego calling the operation "illegal" and branding the U.S. actions as a retreat from its previous diplomatic role to a "world bully" posture.
Russia and China condemned the U.S. operation as an act of aggression, with Russia's Foreign Ministry emphasizing Venezuela’s right to self-determination without outside military intervention. The operation was propelled by significant internal pressure within the Trump administration, particularly from figures like Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who have long advocated for action against Maduro. In South Florida, the epicenter of Venezuelan opposition, the capture of Maduro was celebrated as a transformative event.
Discussions about Maduro’s exit strategy had surfaced before the intervention, proposing that he could step down in three years while allowing his vice president, Delcy Rodriguez, to assume leadership. However, the Trump administration dismissed this plan, viewing Maduro’s governance as illegitimate. Following his capture, the White House emphasized the need for continued involvement in Venezuelan affairs, as Trump stated that the U.S. could not allow a new leader to merely continue Maduro's legacy. The extent of U.S. engagement and the identity of future leadership in Venezuela remain pressing questions.
