Full Breakdown
U.S. Military Operation in Venezuela: A Shift in Global Power Dynamics
1/7/2026, 1:56:10 AM
Operation Absolute Resolve: The Capture of Nicolás Maduro
On January 3, 2026, the United States executed Operation Absolute Resolve, resulting in the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. This operation followed months of escalating pressure, including a naval blockade and the deployment of the USS Gerald R. Ford carrier strike group. The U.S. had long viewed Maduro as illegitimate, having indicted him for leading the Cartel de los Soles, which allegedly trafficked between 200 and 250 metric tons of cocaine annually. Secretary of State Marco Rubio emphasized that Maduro's regime was not a legitimate government but a criminal organization. Despite this, the international response largely focused on the legality of U.S. actions rather than Maduro's regime's criminality.
Global Reactions and Concerns
The military operation sent shockwaves internationally, with immediate condemnation from Russia, China, Iran, and Cuba, all labeling the U.S. actions as violations of international law. Major European allies expressed cautious concern about the operation's legality while aligning with U.S. policy. For instance, U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer acknowledged the end of Maduro's regime but reiterated support for international law. Legal experts criticized the operation, arguing it constituted a "kidnapping" and violated core principles of the United Nations Charter.
Theoretical Frameworks: Decolonial and Doctrinal Perspectives
Two frameworks shape the discourse surrounding U.S. actions: a decolonial moral lens and a doctrinal perspective rooted in post-1945 European legal order. The decolonial view critiques American power as inherently illegitimate, arguing that international law is often manipulated to justify U.S. actions while ignoring the oppressive nature of regimes like Maduro's. Conversely, the doctrinal perspective emphasizes the importance of procedural authorization and non-intervention, viewing U.S. military actions with skepticism and concern for their legality.
The Iron Law Doctrine: A New American Order
Following the operation, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller articulated a doctrine emphasizing that the world is governed by strength and power rather than legality. This marks a significant departure from the post-World War II framework that prioritized multilateralism and legal constraints. Miller's statements suggest a shift towards a more unilateral approach, where U.S. actions are justified by power rather than adherence to international norms.
Criticism and Opposition
Critics argue that the operation sets a dangerous precedent for international relations, potentially undermining global stability. The operation has raised fears among U.S. allies and adversaries alike about future American interventions. Some Latin American leaders warned that the U.S. action could destabilize the region, while legal experts questioned the legitimacy of using military force for regime change.
What's Next: Implications for U.S. Foreign Policy
The implications of Operation Absolute Resolve extend beyond Venezuela, prompting discussions about the future of U.S. foreign policy and its approach to international law. As the U.S. adopts a more aggressive posture, questions arise regarding the potential for military overstretch and the erosion of established norms governing state sovereignty. The operation signals a pivotal moment in U.S. foreign policy, with the potential to reshape global power dynamics and international relations.
Verbatim Quotes
- “We live in a world, in the real world, that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power,” — Stephen Miller, Deputy Chief of Staff
- “The American military attack on Venezuela is a clear violation of the basic principles of the United Nations Charter and the fundamental rules of international law,” — Iranian Government Statement
- “If you detain someone unlawfully, if you take someone into your custody and you do not have the legal right to do that, then what else would you call it?” — Mary Ellen O’Connell, Professor at Notre Dame Law School
- “extremely dangerous precedent for the international community.” — Brazilian Government Statement
This operation marks a critical juncture in U.S. foreign policy, raising fundamental questions about the balance between power and legality in international relations.
