The long-term ramifications of the United States’ capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro remain to be seen, though the newest escalation in both countries’ feud could be viewed as a “major pivot” in U.S. foreign policy.
President Donald Trump said Saturday that a U.S. military operation successfully resulted in Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, being taken from their home on a military base, put into U.S. custody and flown out of their native country to face criminal drug charges in the United States. Maduro has been a focus of an International Criminal Court (ICC) investigation into alleged crimes against humanity committed in Venezuela, including abuses by security forces, though a formal arrest warrant was never issued at the time of the United States’ most recent action.
“The capture of Maduro is a major pivot in American foreign policy in Latin America toward more direct intervention,” Michael Albertus, a political science professor at the University of Chicago, told Military.com. “In concert with the recently released national security policy, it represents a historic shift in relations in the hemisphere.”
The 25-page indictment of Maduro and his wife, publicly announced by U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi publicly announced, alleges that the couple "partnered with narcotics traffickers and narco-terrorist groups, who dispatched processed cocaine from Venezuela to the United States via transshipment points in the Caribbean and Central America, such as Honduras, Guatemala, and Mexico."
Maduro's capture follows months of U.S. military presence in the Caribbean and around Latin America, with the broader mission perpetuated by Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to deter “narco-traffickers” from bringing drugs like fentanyl to the U.S. mainland. Strikes on the alleged drug traffickers in the Caribbean, resulting in numerous vessels sunk and dozens of lives lost, have been scrutinized by some—including members of Congress who have scrutinized the Trump administration’s consistent military actions without lawmakers’ approval.
The 'Peace Through Strength' Agenda
Trump on Saturday posted a photo on his Truth Social page of a blindfolded Maduro aboard the USS Iwo Jima, shown holding bottled water and wearing a gray sweatsuit.
“The United States of America has successfully carried out a large scale [sic] strike against Venezuela and its leader, President Nicolas Maduro, who has been, along with his wife, captured and flown out of the Country. This operation was done in conjunction with U.S. Law Enforcement. Details to follow,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.
Former United States Navy SEAL Robert O’Neill, in remarks to Military.com, praised Trump and DoD for the capture—saying the pair deserve “huge credit…for putting strength back into the term ‘peace through strength.’”
“This mission, following months of escalating pressure from the United States with a buildup of forces in the region and lethal strikes on cartel drug boats, comprised of 150 aircraft launched from bases throughout the western hemisphere,” O’Neill said. “After pre-assault fires, the assault team was on deck for around 30 minutes including the insert, exchanges and the capture.”
Policy Shift to Yesteryear
Two things initially stuck out to Matthew Schmidt, a foreign policy expert and associate professor at the University of New Haven, regarding Maduro’s capture.
The first, he told Military.com, was how U.S. intelligence was able to lead the military and result in an “astounding” tactical response as part of a complex strategic move that according to the Associated Press lasted less than 30 minutes and included seven explosions.
Venezuelan Vice President Delcy Rodríguez said some Venezuelan civilians and military members were killed. Trump, who said some U.S. forces were injured but none were killed, said Saturday that the U.S. is “going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition.”
“This is an astounding affront to the standard interpretation of international law,” Schmidt said. “The press conference, where the president [Trump] said that we will be running a foreign country, speaks to something of the 19th century and the early 20th century.
“It's pretty hard to get your head around this in terms of the way we've understood modern foreign policy for more than a century."
Trump’s latest remarks may have altered the broader perception of how escalations between both nations since September have reached their current boiling point, and whether it’s more about oil than drugs at this juncture.
He told reporters on Saturday after the capture was revealed that he intends to “fix” Venezuela’s oil infrastructure and sell “large amounts” of oil to other countries.
Schmidt said that between U.S. military actions in the Caribbean and Trump’s latest oil-related remarks, it’s difficult to parse out the actual foreign policy intent of the Trump administration.
“The president's speech [on Saturday] seemed to indicate as many times as he pointed out the question of oil in American companies and reimbursement to the U.S., that in his mind this was driven primarily by economic interests,” Schmidt said. “Obviously, before today, the bulk of the narrative has been focused on accusations of Maduro being involved in the drug trade and these wild, impossibly high numbers about American deaths from fentanyl supposedly coming from Venezuela.”
He described it as somewhat of a “bait-and-switch” that could have implications even on the domestic front, as lawmakers including Republicans for months have called for more intel and even votes on war powers acts.
“I think it's deeply problematic for the future of the American military to have it be deployed in such a way without a clear rationale, without a clear strategic aim and legal and moral support behind it,” Schmidt said.
Maduro's Successor
Time will tell if this leads to a broader regional conflict that could possibly envelop other Latin American countries, or whether the capture of the generally unpopular Maduro could nip any future military warfare in the bud.
Schmidt doesn’t expect this to broaden the conflict due to how Venezuelans generally feel about Maduro and aren’t perhaps bemoaning his capture.
“But how he was removed from power is important,” Schmidt added. “It's going to be an important question for the legitimacy of whoever succeeds him. I think it leaves important questions open for the legitimacy of U.S. military force going forward.”
Albertus said the 24-48 hours following Maduro’s capture would determine whether the Venezuelan president’s native cohorts “will concede easily or dig in.”
“But Trump has telegraphed that the U.S. is intent on playing an active and direct role in the transition,” Albertus said. “The most likely scenario is to bring in Edmundo Gonzalez and Maria Corina Machado to serve as key Venezuelan partners in guiding a transition.
“But there will no doubt be considerable and difficult negotiation over the next year or two in determining how Venezuelan oil will be extracted and used in supporting any transition.”
