The United States military operation in Venezuela on January 3, 2026, marks a decisive break in the fragile international system that emerged after the Cold War. In a nighttime raid in Caracas, American special forces captured President Nicolas Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. Explosions struck military bases, power supplies collapsed, and national air traffic was disrupted. Soon after, Washington imposed a naval blockade and announced plans to oversee Venezuela's political transition and manage its oil resources. Donald Trump openly stated that the United States would gain access to Venezuela's vast energy reserves and issued threats against Colombia, Mexico, and even Greenland. This action goes far beyond earlier violations. It openly rejects the principles of sovereignty and non-intervention that the United States once claimed to defend. This was not an isolated incident. It shows the leading power dismantling the very order it helped create, with consequences that extend far beyond Venezuela.
Since 1945, global stability has rested on an imperfect but shared understanding. States, especially powerful ones, would respect territorial integrity and avoid the use of force in return for collective security and economic predictability. The United States was the main architect and beneficiary of this system, shaping institutions such as the United Nations and NATO. Its leadership was justified as a safeguard against chaos and authoritarianism. Critics have long pointed to contradictions, including Vietnam and the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Even then, those actions were framed as difficult exceptions. The Venezuela operation abandons that pretense. A sitting head of state was forcibly removed and taken to New York to face earlier criminal charges. Military strikes damaged national infrastructure, followed by declarations of external control over sovereign resources. International law was not treated as a binding rule, but as something to be ignored when inconvenient.
At the center of this confrontation lies energy and great-power rivalry. Venezuela holds the world's largest proven oil reserves, estimated at over 300 billion barrels, along with major natural gas deposits. Over the past decade, access to these resources shifted away from Western companies toward Chinese and Russian firms through loans and joint ventures. For Washington, this shift represents a strategic threat. Energy security remains central to military power and economic strength. By removing the Maduro government and reopening oil fields to American companies such as Chevron, the United States seeks to reverse this trend and reassert dominance in the Western Hemisphere. This fits into a wider confrontation with China and Russia that began with sanctions and has now escalated into direct military force. Yet this approach ignores how open resource control through coercion fuels resentment and pushes rival powers closer together.
This strategy suffers from a fundamental weakness. Lasting global leadership cannot rest on force alone. American influence once relied not only on military strength, but on persuasion. Alliances were built on shared benefits such as open markets, security guarantees, and technological cooperation. When coercion replaces consent, the costs rise quickly. Allies begin to question reliability and values, reflected in the cautious and divided responses from Europe after the Caracas raid. Neutral states reduce dependence and adjust their foreign policies. Rivals such as China and Russia gain a powerful narrative and a reason to deepen cooperation, with Beijing already calling for Maduro's release and warning of long-term regional instability. Across Latin America, even governments critical of Maduro fear the precedent of foreign military removal of a government. While acting president Delcy Rodriguez has spoken of cooperation with Washington, many observers see this as compliance under extreme pressure rather than genuine diplomacy.
Inside Venezuela, the human and political consequences are likely to be
grave. Early reports suggest more than 80 people were killed, including
civilians. History shows that externally imposed regime change rarely
brings order. It weakens institutions, fractures opposition movements,
empowers armed groups, and creates prolonged instability. Venezuela
already faces a severe humanitarian crisis, with over seven million
people leaving the country since 2015
From a legal standpoint, the operation severely damages the foundations of international law. Article 2(4) of the UN Charter prohibits the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. This rule protects weaker countries from domination by stronger ones. Ignoring it creates a dangerous security dilemma. States respond by prioritizing military self-reliance, encouraging arms races and increasing the risk of conflict. Latin America's history gives this fear special weight. US interventions in Panama, Guatemala, and Chile left long-lasting trauma and instability. The Venezuela raid revives these memories and explains the strong regional condemnation. Many governments now worry that pursuing policies outside Washington's preferences could make them future targets. Global reactions, including comparisons to past military failures such as Somalia in 1993, reflect growing concern over unchecked power.
Inside Venezuela, the human and political consequences are likely to be grave. Early reports suggest more than 80 people were killed, including civilians. History shows that externally imposed regime change rarely brings order. It weakens institutions, fractures opposition movements, empowers armed groups, and creates prolonged instability. Venezuela already faces a severe humanitarian crisis, with over seven million people leaving the country since 2015. Further chaos could accelerate migration and strain neighboring states such as Colombia and Brazil.
The US-led seizure of Venezuela's president did not merely cross a red line. It erased it. For years, Washington relied on sanctions and diplomatic pressure. Removing a foreign leader by force on his own soil signals a shift toward direct coercion and sends a clear message to the world. When American interests are blocked, established rules no longer apply.
Other powers have taken notice. Shortly after the Caracas raid, China launched large-scale military exercises around Taiwan under the name Justice Mission 2025. The timing was significant. It showed how major states interpret Washington's actions as permission to act more aggressively in their own regions.
The attack on Venezuela did more than deepen a regional crisis. It may have accelerated the transition to a contested multipolar world. As great powers act with fewer restraints, international norms weaken and global insecurity grows. In trying to preserve dominance, the United States risks dismantling the system that once sustained it.
The writer is an advocate of the Supreme Court
