I have refrained from commenting on the outrageous act of imperialism by the US in Venezuela because the immediate aftermath of such things is confusion and misinformation and it takes a while for a more accurate picture to emerge. What I did expect to see was that after deposing the president Nicolas Maduro, the US would announce that there was an interim president chosen by them and that there would be statements by at least some top military leaders that they supported the new leader. That is usually how these things play out.
But not in this case. For some reason, Trump has been dismissive about the person that I expected that he would announce as the new leader, opposition leader Maria Corina Machado, which is surprising given that she is an ardent Trump supporter. The fact that she had just won the Nobel peace prize would give her some credibility, even if some of us have long dismissed that prize as worthless. But Trump dismissed the idea of her taking over saying that she was not consulted and that she “doesn’t have the support” within Venezuela.
Instead Trump said that the vice-president Delcy Rodríguez would be the new president and would work with the US. She was sworn in as president but denied that she had agreed to work with Trump and said that Maduro was the only president. There have also been no statements from the military leaders either way. Of course, it is possible that secret deals have been made that will trickle out over the coming days but as of now, it looks like the goal of the US attack was to capture Maduro and his wife and there was no real plan for what to do after that, which is really strange.
The parallel that comes to mind is Iran. The sixty-nine year old Mohammed Mossadeq was swept into power in 1951 and elected prime minister. He proceeded to nationalize the oil industry which had been under the control of the British-owned Anglo-Iranian Oil Company and had been ruthlessly exploiting that country’s resources for its own benefit. The British MI6 and the US CIA immediately set about trying to depose Mossadeq and impose its puppet Reza Pahlavi as the new leader, under a plan known by the code name Ajax. This included bribing Iranian military leaders, editors, journalists, politicians, religious leaders and others to undermine Mosssadeq by creating chaos and laying the groundwork for a coup. That plan succeeded in 1953 and the elderly prime minister was captured and flung into captivity where he remained until his death in 1967. Pahlavi was installed as leader and remained in power with US support that included creating the notrious secret police SAVAK that tortured and terrorized people and alienated the public, enabling Ayatollah Khomeini to marshal support for the overthrow of Pahlavi 1979. (See Quicksand by Geoffey Wawro, p. 125-152).
This is what normally happens when the US deposes a foreign leader it does not like. This was the pattern in Chile with the overthrow in 1973 of its president Salvador Allende and the installation of another torturer general Augusto Pinochet. Even with the military invasion of Iraq, after overthrowing Saddam Hussein, the US quickly installed an administrator to run things, while preparing to install their own puppet.
But, so far at least, nothing like that seems to have occurred in Venezuela, unless Rodriquez has struck a secret deal and is merely biding her time until the time is ripe to announce that she will work with the US and hand over control of the countries oil and mineral resources to US companies.
“What is being done to Venezuela is an atrocity that violates international law. History and justice will make the extremists who promoted this armed aggression pay,” she said. “There is only one president in Venezuela and his name is Nicolás Maduro.”
In a crisis that blends political theatre, military power and economic calculation, the defiance may have been to some extent performative – a sop to the Bolivarian revolution’s humiliated loyalists, especially those in the armed forces, while Rodríguez consolidates her position.
To stay in power – assuming that is her goal – she must accommodate US demands while shoring up an authoritarian regime that is despised by many Venezuelans. One wrong step could trigger an internal putsch, a street uprising or another blast of US firepower.
…A senior official told the New York Times: “I’m not claiming that she’s the permanent solution to the country’s problems, but she’s certainly someone we think we can work at a much more professional level than we were able to do with [Maduro].”
The English-speaking technocrat impressed Trump’s team with her management of Venezuela’s oil industry and intermediaries convinced the administration that she would protect and champion future American energy investments in the country, the paper reported.
For Trump that was enough to ditch an alternative candidate to replace Maduro: María Corina Machado. The opposition leader mobilised Edmundo González’s winning presidential campaign last year – Maduro ignored the result – and won the Nobel peace prize.
…Unlike many of Maduro’s inner circle, Rodríguez has not been indicted for drug trafficking or other charges in the US. Trump’s team hope it has found a market-friendly technocrat who can steer the regime while taking direction from Washington. For Rodríguez, a vertiginous tightrope awaits.
But what of the larger consequences of this act of naked imperialism?
[S]ince the mid-19th century, the US has intervened in its continental neighbours not only through economic pressure but also militarily, with a long list of invasions, occupations and, in the case most closely resembling the current situation, the capture of Panama’s dictator Manuel Noriega in 1989.
Covert actions helped topple democratically elected governments and usher in military dictatorships in countries such as Brazil, Chile and Argentina, but overt US military operations have historically been confined to closer neighbours in Central America and the Caribbean.
The first direct US military attack on a South American country “signals a major shift in foreign and defence policy – one that is made explicit in the new national security strategy published by the Trump administration a few weeks ago”, said Maurício Santoro, a professor of international relations at the State University of Rio de Janeiro.
The article goes on describe covert and overt US imperialism in various countries such as Mexico, Cuba, Haiti, Brazil, and Panama. And of course there have been a whole slew of other US interventions such as in Colombia, EL Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Grenada. You can be sure that secretary of state Marco Rubio, a passionate Cuba hater, is pushing hard for an invasion of Cuba so that the country can return to its pre-revolutionary days as a haven for US business interests.
But back to Venezuela. The current state of a leadership vacuum cannot last long. Either we have a quick acceptance of Rodriquez’s leadership accompanied by statements of support by the military, which would suggest that there was more to invasion planning than just the capture of Maduro, or we enter a period of anarchy.
While most of the world has condemned the attack, the countries of western Europe and Canada have been, as expected, at best equivocal and at worst supportive, with the leaders of the UK and Canada showing once again their utter spinelessness and willingness to tolerate anything that Trump does.
Philippe Sands KC, a human rights lawyer who has known Starmer for several decades, said it was clear the action was “manifestly illegal under international law, and cannot plausibly or by any reasonable standard be characterised as a law enforcement action”.
Sands said Starmer’s failure to condemn the action “speaks volumes”. “Having lived through the catastrophe and criminality of the Iraq war in 2003, which Mr Trump himself has condemned, I would hope that Keir Starmer sticks to the principles of legality to which he says he is so firmly committed,” he said.
That is wishful thinking. Starmer has shown that he has no principles, other than being a milquetoast who, following a long line of UK prime ministers, will support anything that the US president does, even if that president is an imperialist fascist like Trump.
Mano, it’s important to remember that not only did Machado successfully create, organize, and lead the resistance against Maduro (so obviously the people did support her), but she won the Nobel Peace Prize. And--most importantly--she’s a woman. Combine all three things that Trump hates--but mostly the fact that she’s a woman--and you see why he’s not in favor of her taking over the country.
As a Canadian, I am disappointed by the official reaction of our prime minister but at the same time I understand it. We’re in the direct line of fire for any future intervention, military or otherwise, and forceful condemnation would do nothing other than angering Trump. We’re still way to dependent on the US for a lot of things but at least Carney is doing something to change that.
The Maduros never even bothered to apply for visas.
They are undocumented aliens, and must be deported to their home country immediately!
Hasn’t Trump learnt anything from Putin? When you take over a government of a major foreign adversary, keep quiet about it.
I am not a conspiracy theorist. I was sceptical about the “assassination attempt” in ’24, but I’ve been convinced that yes, the guy actually could legitimately have been that bad of a shot, despite everything. That said:
This stinks of set up. Specifically, it smells really badly of something that was planned, agreed, and notified in advance. For instance -- Russia evacuated all its diplomats from Venezuela just before Christmas. By some credible accounts, the Veep Delcy Rodriguez is IN Russia right now. It’s almost as if they had notice of what was going to go down, and when. Is it possible Maduro has made some sort of deal?
Consider: if some bunch of armed foreigners turned up in e.g. Canada or the UK and made a grab for their Prime Minister, is it even vaguely conceivable that the security details charged with protecting those people would simply sit back and allow it? Specifically, is it conceivable that a force, regardless of strength or organisation or technological superiority could effect a kidnap of a national leader and not suffer a single casualty? Not ONE bodyguard put one of the attackers down? You think Maduro didn’t have any protection? You think they were somehow ALL bought off, or successfully bypassed? It doesn’t pass the smell test, to me. Recall that when Seal Team Six terminated bin Laden, they didn’t come home with all their helicopters, and he was just some dude in a mansion without air defences. Venezuela has spent BILLIONS on Russian air defence tech, and where was that, exactly? How many US aircraft were shot down or even mildly inconvenienced?
And this, indeed, may be one reason why Canada and the UK are coming across as quite so fucking poodle-like -- they know something we don’t. They know this wasn’t a unilateral, risky and incredibly successful operation, it was an Uber to NYC for someone whose economy is crashing and who could see the writing on the wall and who decided to try to plea bargain a way for at least his family to get an outcome that didn’t involve hanging upside down from a streetlight.
Obviously all this will come out in the end… but right now this doesn’t look to me at all like what it’s being portrayed as, not least because Trump is SAYING it’s a unilateral and incredibly successful strike, which, come on people, should clue you in at least to the idea that that’s probably not true?
@5 sonofrojblake: Miami Herald: Exclusive: Venezuelan leaders offered U.S. a path to stay in power without Maduro
Apparently there was an ongoing attempt to cut a deal. This may be why Trump thought Rodriguez was ready to work with the US. The cynical side says there may actually be a deal but once Maduro was kidnapped Rodriguez can’t appear too friendly with the US or she looses support. More likely she may have been ready to cut a deal before but now isn’t so interested as it’s clear that the US doesn’t want a deal, they want a puppet.
sonofrojblake @A # 5: … when Seal Team Six terminated bin Laden, they didn’t come home with all their helicopters…
Due entirely to their own incompetent planning, and not at all to ObL’s defense crew.
Special military operations do not work out as planned.
Pentagon har wargamed Venezuela for decades, and does not work out better than Iraq.
Maybe Rodriguez is interested in cooperating with Trump, and that explains a lot.
But if not, another possibility is that Putin pointed out to Trump that Russia and the USA are both oil exporting countries, and so they would both benefit from higher oil prices if Venezuela stopped competing with them. You need a competent and cooperative government to sell a lot of oil. But if it’s enough of a win to just take them off the market for a few years, then Trump doesn’t have to care about whether Venezuela has a good government or total anarchy. In fact, creating anarchy in Venezuela is a win for Trump, both for oil prices rising and for the anarchy creating a pseudo-excuse for having invaded. All Trump thinks he needs to do is to maintain the anarchy there.
Of course, this plan would benefit Putin a lot more than the USA, but Putin probably didn’t mention that to Trump.
I suspect they have no plans, only ideas, and most of them stupid. They’ll try the stupider ones first.
While I’m not sure that amateur speculation has much value, I do have a couple of thoughts…
First off, a long-standing maxim of mine is “foreign policy is mostly about domestic politics”. Grand strategy is generally less important than short-term political considerations -- basically “how does this play with the folks at home?” Most leaders will happily flush the long-term interests of their country down the crapper for a 2-week boost in the polls.
Secondly, when it comes to the Trump
administrationregime: “No matter how stupid you think it is, it’s always stupider than you think -- even after taking this maxim into account”.Anybody wondering what the plan is is making the mistake of assuming there is a plan. It’s not 4D chess, it’s someone playing tic-tac-toe against themselves and still managing to lose.
Now, it may be that a faction within Venezuela has figured out how to use this to their advantage, in which case I’d warn them to remember the old adage about catching a tiger by the tail…
Event the very obvious (and explicit) oil play probably isn’t going to work out well… Yes, there are a few refineries in the US specifically designed to be able to cope with Venezuelan heavy crude, but I have some pretty serious doubts that there’s much appetite for the level of investment needed, and further doubts about even the medium-term economic viability of such operations. Global oil demand is still rising, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised if it peaks earlier than expected, and there’s no reason to think that the market is tight enough to absorb any increase in capacity without pushing prices down to the point where marginal production is uneconomic.
I very much doubt this is going to end well for anybody.
Good question.
No one knows.
.1. It is likely that the US has no long term coherent plans for what to do with Venezuela. The Trump regime is inept and incompetent and they just make things up as they go along.
Trump is senile and has no interest or ability to think things through. We are literally being ruled by someone with the mind of a toddling 4 year old.
.2. The Maduo government in Venezuela isn’t any better.
They managed to take the country with the world’s largest oil reserves and create widespread poverty.
Confronted by the USA, they were still caught sleeping when the US attacked.
I have no idea what is happening in the government there now, but it is possible nothing is happening. They could be doing a good imitation of a deer in the headlights.
When an incompetent aggressor collides with an incompetent victim, what happens?
The most likely result here is chaos like we saw when we occupied Afghanistan, Iraq, or Somalia.
A related question is what is next for the rest of the Western hemisphere.
In the last few days, Trump has threatened to invade Columbia, Mexico, Cuba, and Greenland.
In the last few weeks, we’ve also threatened and/or bombed Iran, Syria, and Nigeria.
The 4 year old imperialists running the USA are on a roll here.
They will definitely attack someone again and soon.
Probably Iran, and we may attack and invade Cuba.
Cuba is a failing nation 90 miles from the USA. They couldn’t stop us.
@snowberry @10
Im sure they have “A concept of a plan” -- it will be released right after they release their replacement for Obamacare -- Which is slated to happen immediately after all Epstein files, with all of Epstiens allies names unredacted are released
Now that Trump has started a war, he can’t chicken out. He painted himself in a corner. Europe can’t ignore the threat anymore and just babble about “peaceful transition” and “rules-based international order”. We are back to Hobbesian politics.
Henrik Dahl, a Danish Member of the European Parliament, stops being diplomatic:
https://www.euronews.com/2026/01/05/europe-must-stop-pretending-there-was-ever-a-truly-rules-based-international-order
The long-term threats is serious damage to the NATO and the EU. Those are items #2 and #3 on Putin’s wish list. Item #1 is restoring the Soviet Union, and thanks to Trump, that is much closer now.
Trump will be remembered as the worst president ever.
…Trump has been dismissive about the person that I expected that he would announce as the new leader, opposition leader Maria Corina Machado, which is surprising given that she is an ardent Trump supporter. The fact that she had just won the Nobel peace prize would give her some credibility…
Maybe it gave her too much credibility, which would mean too much ability to stand on her own, with her own support-base, independent of Trump (who DIDN’T get that bit of credibility).
…it looks like the goal of the US attack was to capture Maduro and his wife and there was no real plan for what to do after that, which is really strange.
For Trump, it’s not strange at all. Impulsive bullying and total disregard for long-term consequences are Trump’s brand, and always have been.