Millions of Americans woke up with the same question on the first Saturday of the new year: Are we at war with Venezuela?
Donald Trump’s ouster of President Nicolás Maduro has stunning implications for Venezuela, for the global power of the United States, and for the already fragmented constitutional limits on American presidential power and international law.
The ostensible justification is that Maduro was at the top of a cartel state that threatens the security of the US and the well-being of its citizens through drug trafficking. But Trump’s claims exaggerate Venezuela’s role, and his evident pleasure in exerting influence in his geopolitical backyard reveals more ambitious motives.
Few oppressed Venezuelan citizens will mourn the removal of a dictator who destroyed lives and ruined economic opportunities.
But the lightning operation against Maduro was shocking. And not just because the removal of a foreign leader is considered an act of war.
Trump’s entire political philosophy was based on avoiding further US “shock and awe” operations to impose regime change abroad, after two decades of military quagmire.
What happened to the plan to stop interfering in intractable foreign policies that the US doesn’t understand? Is “America First” over?
Probably not. Contrary to that, it is in super-powered mode.
Trump continues to act in cold pursuit of what he considers to be vital US interests. The difference is that their definition of this concept has expanded enormously since 2016. So has their appetite for exercising unchecked power, which has now surpassed the borders of the US and is spreading across the Americas and beyond.
“America will never allow foreign powers to steal from our people or push us out of our own hemisphere,” Trump warned in a notable press conference on Saturday at his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida. “With our new national security strategy, American dominance in the Western Hemisphere will never again be questioned.”
Last Saturday proves that the United States has returned to times when presidents and intelligence services sought to overthrow autocratic or troublesome leaders in favor of puppet governments. It also evokes dark memories of CIA political interference, including in Latin America, which often had effects contrary to those intended.
How the operation in Venezuela could result
If Trump’s optimistic projections come true, his domestic political exposure could be limited. It could alleviate the suffering of the Venezuelan people, create stability in northern South America, allow the return of Venezuelan refugees, and halt the efforts of US rivals, such as China and Russia, to gain a foothold that threatens American security and interests.
An apparently successful military operation, with no combat deaths on the US side, to capture Maduro will only reinforce Trump’s reputation as an orchestrator of sudden displays of military power following attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities last year.
His reinvigorated strongman cult of personality will please some Republican voters, as will his flouting of constitutional limits and liberal critics. This could discourage rebellions from GOP dissidents who know that the Constitution stipulates that Congress – not the president – declares war.
But the president is taking risks with many members of his eroding political base, already angered by attacks on Iran, Nigeria, Syria and now Venezuela, as well as apparent indifference to difficult economic conditions at home. Democrats are already exploring this issue as a pillar of their campaign, ahead of the November midterm elections.
It is crucial to the GOP’s political outlook that the US does not find itself involved in Venezuela with large deployments of ground troops reminiscent of the chaos of the post-9/11 wars. But if Maduro’s initial ouster degenerates into violence, as has happened in previous regime change operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, Trump will face serious political problems.
Was this Trump’s “Mission Accomplished” moment?
Trump’s triumphant press conference on Saturday afternoon at Mar-a-Lago, as Maduro was transferred to a New York jail, brimmed with arrogance. It was hard not to remember George W. Bush’s 2003 victory lap on the aircraft carrier, just before a bloody insurgency plunged Iraq into chaos.
“No other president has ever demonstrated this kind of leadership, courage and determination, the most powerful combination the world has ever seen,” extolled Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, ignoring Abraham Lincoln’s heroism in the Civil War, Franklin Roosevelt’s bold leadership on D-Day or John F. Kennedy’s steadfastness in the Cuban Missile Crisis.
This hagiography could be especially dangerous for the mentality of a president who already considers himself infallible and omnipotent.
The disasters in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya after the fall of Muammar Gaddafi in 2011 deeply affected Americans because they were the result of Washington’s negligence after an initial triumph. Venezuela, with 31 million people, brutal security forces, criminal and gang culture, and fragmented governance and economy, seems an ideal candidate for a social implosion, common when tyrants are suddenly deposed.
Trump was flippant about what comes next, but his candor was shocking. And their true motives seem to point to a modern form of colonialism.
“We will manage the country until we can make a safe, adequate and judicious transition,” said Trump, echoing all the regime change clichés. “We are not afraid to put boots on the ground if necessary,” he said, raising the possibility of sending American forces to a semi-failed and volatile state.
And remember the incessant complaint from opponents of the Iraq war that the war was “actually about oil”? This time there are no doubts.
“The oil companies are going to come in. They’re going to invest money. We’re going to get back the oil that, frankly, we should have gotten back a long time ago,” Trump said.
However, he did not provide answers about how the US would “govern” Venezuela, although he suggested that Marco Rubio, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Dan Caine and Hegseth would be involved.
Any attempt to revive the oil industry destroyed by Maduro and Hugo Chávez will take years and require a massive U.S. security presence. This will not be a quick operation. Trump will be responsible for the consequences, whether there is peace, civil disintegration or a new tyrant.
Still, no one can comfortably predict what will happen.
The first wave of criticism of Trump-style regime change had the tone of someone fighting the last war. The Iraq model may not apply to Venezuela. The country does not have the religious and tribal divisions or belligerent neighbors like Iran, which pushed Iraq to hell in 2003. Furthermore, the Trump administration has not yet dismantled the state apparatus, as Bush’s envoys in Baghdad did, with disastrous results.
Trump hinted that his administration would be speaking with Venezuelan Vice President Delcy Rodríguez, saying she would be “essentially willing to do what we think is necessary to make Venezuela great again.”
Delcy Rodríguez, however, was defiant in a speech in Caracas, accusing the US of “kidnapping” Maduro and demanding his return. And, although Trump spoke of a “judicious” transition, he did not commit to a return to democracy, leaving his preference for a docile regime in Caracas implicit.
Democrats furious, Republicans side with Trump
The president’s actions have already triggered an internal political storm.
While there was initially an attempt to portray Maduro’s capture as a police operation to serve a drug trafficking charge, Trump’s statements about dominating the Western Hemisphere and appropriating Venezuelan oil place the operation on even weaker legal and constitutional grounds.
Air and ground attacks in Venezuela clearly fall within the definition of US military action that requires prior authorization from Congress, as happened before the war on terrorism and the invasion of Iraq.
“Last night, President Trump waged war on a foreign nation without authorization, without notice and without any explanation to the American people,” said Democratic Senator Jack Reed. “Whatever comes next, Trump will be responsible for the consequences.”
Jack Reed added: “This was a profound constitutional failure. Congress – not the president – has the sole power to authorize war.”
Senator Tim Kaine reinforced: “Congress must reaffirm its critical constitutional role in matters of war, peace, diplomacy and trade.”
But in the short term, Trump appears immune to pressure on Capitol Hill. Republican leaders expressed support. Even Rand Paul supported Maduro’s removal, while remembering constitutional limits.
Trump’s political base, however, remains fragile. A CBS poll in November showed that 70% of Americans oppose military action. Even MAGA figures expressed discontent.
Abroad, the attack confirmed that Trump’s national security strategy – regional dominance and limited focus elsewhere – is real. Russia and China will eventually use this principle of the strong over the weak to their advantage.
“The 47th president of the United States is not someone who plays games,” Rubio said. “When he says he’s going to solve a problem, he means it. He acts.”
The big question about Trump is now more urgent than ever: How far will he go? And who will stop it?
