U.S. Capture of Nicolás Maduro and the Inception of a New, Volatile Foreign Policy Doctrine

Strategic Overview

On January 3, 2026, a U.S. military operation culminated in the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, who are now in U.S. custody and face federal narcoterrorism charges. While framed as a law enforcement action against drug trafficking, the operation—involving over 150 aircraft, airstrikes across Caracas, and elite special forces—constitutes the most significant U.S. military intervention in Latin America in decades. President Trump has declared the U.S. will “run the country” until a transition and seize control of its vast oil reserves. This action is not a tactical strike but the execution of a new, overt doctrine of hemispheric dominance. It discards multilateral norms for unilateral force, setting a global precedent that risks accelerating great power conflict, destabilizing regional orders, and inviting retaliatory actions against U.S. interests worldwide.

Operational Context

The “Absolute Resolve” Playbook: Codenamed Operation Absolute Resolve, the action followed a months-long, deliberate pressure campaign. Beginning in August 2025, the U.S. deployed warships and initiated strikes on alleged drug-trafficking vessels. This escalated to a naval blockade, covert CIA operations, and the seizure of Venezuelan oil tankers in December. The capture itself was a high-risk decapitation strike, leveraging intelligence from a source close to Maduro and rehearsals on a mockup of his safehouse. The stated legal basis is a 2020 narcoterrorism indictment, repurposed to justify a cross-border military raid.

Immediate Aftermath: A Controlled Vacuum? The U.S. achieved its primary objective but not regime collapse. Venezuela’s Supreme Court has directed Vice President Delcy Rodríguez—a Maduro loyalist—to assume the duties of acting president, and the military high command has publicly backed her. Key regime figures remain in power. This creates a paradoxical situation: the U.S. claims authority while the ousted regime’s structures nominally retain control, leading to competing claims of legitimacy between Rodríguez, the U.S.-backed opposition, and Nobel laureate María Corina Machado. The U.S. holds the stick—threatening Rodríguez to “lead, or get out of the way”—but possesses an uncertain carrot.

The Core Prize: Energy Security Realignment. Venezuela holds the world’s largest proven oil reserves (303 billion barrels) but produces a mere 1 million barrels per day due to mismanagement and sanctions. President Trump explicitly linked the operation to “recover[ing] stolen oil,” signaling a resource-driven objective. Unlocking this reserve would diversify global supply away from Russia and the Middle East, undercut a primary energy source for China (which currently receives most Venezuelan exports), and provide a strategic commodity under greater U.S. influence.

Geopolitical Tensions

Erosion of the International Order: UN Secretary-General António Guterres stated the action “constitute[s] a dangerous precedent” and demonstrates a lack of respect for international law and the UN Charter. The principle of sovereign equality is breached, reinforcing a “might makes right” framework that powers like China and Russia can exploit elsewhere. This risks triggering a cascade of unilateral interventions globally.

Fractured Global Response: Reactions reveal a world divided not along traditional East-West lines but by principles versus power.

· Condemnation: China demanded Maduro’s “immediate” release. Russia and regional powers have denounced the violation of sovereignty.

· Cautious Criticism: European and other traditional U.S. allies have expressed deep concern and called for restraint and respect for law.

· Regional Rift: Latin America is split. While some governments welcome Maduro’s removal, others, like Mexico, see it as a dangerous return to gunboat diplomacy. Neighbors like Colombia are bracing for instability.

· A Global South Warning: Voices from Africa and the Caribbean—regions with deep historical experience of intervention—frame this as a selective application of law that threatens the sovereignty of all weaker states, arguing “silence… is permission”.

The “Trump Corollary” in Action: This intervention operationalizes a de facto “Trump Corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine: an assertion that the U.S. has the unilateral right to forcibly remove governments it deems hostile, corrupt, or threatening within its sphere of influence, with resource control as a central motive. Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s insistence that the U.S. is “not at war with Venezuela” attempts to legally frame a military invasion as a policing action, a distinction without a difference on the ground.

Strategic Outlook

Baseline: The U.S. owns the outcome in Venezuela but does not control it. A swift, stable transition is unlikely. The most probable path is prolonged volatility, with the U.S. attempting to govern by remote coercion while navigating between a hostile residual government, a fractured opposition, and an empowered military.

What to Watch (Next 2–4 Weeks):

• Maduro’s Trial: The January 5 court appearance and subsequent legal proceedings will be a global spectacle, testing the “law enforcement” narrative.
• Rodríguez’s Calculus: Will the acting president, under U.S. threat and military pressure, cut a deal for her survival and incremental change, or harden her stance?
• Military Fissures: The Venezuelan military’s unity is key. Signals of fracture between hardline Chavistas and factions seeking a deal with the U.S. would indicate coming instability.
• Oil Market Mechanics: Any move by the U.S. to formally lift sanctions or announce deals for American oil companies will be the clearest signal of its intended end-state.

Implications

• For the U.S.: This “interventionism on steroids” achieves a short-term demonstration of power but commits Washington to an open-ended, high-risk governance project with no clear exit. It empowers unilateralists within the administration while damaging diplomatic capital with allies. The precedent set may soon constrain the U.S., as rivals cite it to justify their own actions.

• For China & Russia: The operation is a direct challenge. China loses a key energy partner and sees a model for how a rival might act against its partners. Russia witnesses the dismissal of sovereignty it claims to uphold in Ukraine. Both will seek to impose costs elsewhere, potentially through escalated actions in Taiwan or Eastern Europe, testing the newly established “rules.”

• For the Global South (including Africa): The precedent is existential. It signals that the sovereignty of weaker, resource-rich states is contingent on the interests of great powers. This will accelerate militarization of diplomacy, force harder choices in aligning with competing blocs, and may incentivize preemptive nuclear proliferation among secondary states seeking deterrence against regime-change operations.

Conclusion: The capture of Maduro is a watershed, marking the deliberate abandonment of a rules-based order in favor of a transactional, power-based system. The immediate crisis is in Caracas, but the lasting impact will be a more volatile and dangerous world where the threat of unilateral intervention has been re-normalized. The United States has won a battle but may have initiated a broader war for which it is unprepared.