U.S. Captures Venezuela’s Maduro in Daring Strike, Shaking Nation and World
- Eight Point Solutions News Room
- 6 days ago
- 15 min read
U.S. Special Forces Strike Caracas and Capture Maduro
In a stunning operation before dawn on January 3, U.S. special forces struck multiple sites in Venezuela’s capital and surrounding regions, seizing President Nicolás Maduro in what the Trump administration called a mission to “bring him to justice.” Elite Delta Force commandos carried out the raid that extracted Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, from Caracas, following months of military buildup in the Caribbean. U.S. jets and drones hit targets in at least four Venezuelan states, including a military airbase, a naval academy, and even Caracas’s legislative palace, under cover of darkness. Venezuela’s government accused Washington of “a brutal act of aggression”, saying soldiers, civilians and much of Maduro’s personal guard were killed in the strikes, though it has not released a death toll. Residents in Catia La Mar, near one target, described waking to explosions that leveled homes. “It’s sheer luck they didn’t kill my kids,” said one father amid the rubble of his apartment, noting his family escaped seconds before the roof collapsed. While unconfirmed local reports speak of dozens dead, U.S. officials have not detailed any casualties or losses on the American side. The Pentagon emphasized the operation was “narrowly focused on Maduro and his regime’s assets”, and there is no indication of a wider American troop occupation on the ground at this time.
Maduro’s capture marks the most dramatic U.S. intervention in Latin America since the 1989 invasion of Panama, a comparison not lost on regional observers. President Donald Trump hailed the operation as a “historic victory for freedom”, claiming it “removed an illegitimate dictator” who Washington says rigged Venezuela’s 2024 elections and ran a “narco-state.” Trump had repeatedly accused Maduro of flooding U.S. streets with cocaine and harboring terrorists, allegations that formed the public rationale for the strike. However, in a press conference hours after the raid, the President signaled broader ambitions: he said the United States would “run Venezuela temporarily” to stabilize it and “get the oil flowing”. He touted Maduro’s ouster as a foreign policy triumph and waved off questions about legality, insisting he had constitutional authority to act against an “imminent threat”. The U.S. had quietly positioned the USS Gerald R. Ford carrier strike group off Venezuela’s coast in recent weeks and even conducted a series of seizures and strikes on alleged drug-running boats tied to Caracas. Those moves, largely unnoticed over the holidays, set the stage for what unfolded Saturday. By Sunday, American F-35 fighter jets were seen patrolling offshore, but U.S. officials said no further strikes were underway and described the situation as “mission accomplished, for now.”
Maduro Held in U.S. Custody, Facing Federal Charges
Flown out of Venezuela under heavy guard, Nicolás Maduro arrived in New York on Saturday night to face U.S. justice. The former Venezuelan president, long considered illegitimate by Washington, was transferred to the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, where he and his wife Cilia Flores are being held on narcoterrorism and drug trafficking charges. Both Maduro and Flores are accused in a 2020 federal indictment of orchestrating a “narco-state” conspiracy that flooded the U.S. with cocaine in partnership with Colombian guerrilla groups designated as terrorists. U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi touted the arrests, declaring that the pair “will soon face the full wrath of American justice on American soil”. A superseding indictment unsealed this weekend adds additional charges against Maduro, Flores, and several top Venezuelan officials, accusing them of using government positions to facilitate cocaine trafficking over two decades. Maduro has vehemently denied these charges in the past, dismissing them as political fabrications.
Maduro’s initial court appearance is scheduled for Monday at noon in U.S. District Court in Manhattan, before Judge Alvin Hellerstein. Legal experts say the case could mirror the 1990 trial of Panama’s General Manuel Noriega, the last instance of a foreign head of state captured by U.S. forces and brought to an American courtroom. If convicted, the 63-year-old Maduro faces the possibility of life in U.S. prison. Venezuela has no extradition treaty with Washington; U.S. authorities characterize his transfer as an extraordinary rendition under unique circumstances. Already, a team of public defenders and private attorneys has stepped up to represent Maduro. They argue the U.S. strike violated international law and Venezuelan sovereignty, and they plan to contest the jurisdiction of U.S. courts. Meanwhile, security around the federal courthouse has been tightened, with metal barricades and a visible NYPD and U.S. Marshals presence. Small groups of protesters gathered outside the Brooklyn jail over the weekend, some denouncing “U.S. imperialism” and calling for Maduro’s release, others voicing support for his prosecution and justice for the Venezuelan people. The spectacle of a former head of state in U.S. custody is certain to spark a protracted legal and diplomatic saga in the months ahead.
Power Vacuum in Caracas as Acting Leader Named
Back in Venezuela, the aftermath of Maduro’s removal has left a fragile political vacuum and palpable uncertainty on the streets. In the immediate hours following the U.S. strike, Venezuela’s Vice President Delcy Rodríguez took to state television, angrily denouncing the attack and demanding Maduro’s return. Rodríguez insisted that “Maduro remains the only president of Venezuela”, even as she simultaneously vowed to maintain order in his absence. By midday Sunday, Venezuela’s pro-Maduro Supreme Court issued a ruling formally naming Rodríguez as acting president for 90 days, citing constitutional succession after the “temporary incapacitation” of the head of state. Flanked by senior military commanders, Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino López announced the armed forces’ recognition of Rodríguez as interim leader. The move appeared aimed at projecting continuity and calming any power struggles: Rodríguez has been a Maduro loyalist and was his hand-picked deputy since 2018. In her Sunday night statement, however, Rodríguez struck a notably conciliatory tone toward Washington despite her outrage. She said Venezuela seeks “peace and peaceful coexistence” and even invited the U.S. “to work together on a cooperation agenda…within the framework of international legality”, while pointedly warning President Trump that Latin America “deserves dialogue, not war”. Her dual messaging underscores the regime’s complex position: defiant against foreign intervention, yet keen to avoid further bloodshed or total rupture.
On the streets of Caracas, a tense calm held on Sunday. The usual bustle of traffic was absent; most shops and gas stations remained shuttered. Many residents had rushed to buy groceries and fuel on Saturday once news broke of explosions in the capital. By Sunday, those lines had subsided, but uncertainty lingered. Armed civilians and soldiers ringed the Miraflores presidential palace, setting up checkpoints, a show of force to deter any internal challenges. Thus far, there have been no reports of major clashes in the streets, and the feared mass unrest has not materialized. Some pro-Maduro groups held small demonstrations in Caracas, chanting anti-American slogans and holding portraits of Chávez. State TV aired images of supporters rallying to “defend the homeland,” though these gatherings appeared relatively small. Many Venezuelans, exhausted by years of economic crisis, appeared to adopt a wait-and-see stance at home. “It’s tense but quiet,” one Caracas resident said by phone, noting that people are anxious about what comes next but also relieved the initial chaos was short-lived.
Outside the capital, the human impact of the U.S. strikes is still coming into focus. In La Guaira state north of Caracas, families spent Sunday cleaning up debris from homes wrecked by blasts that targeted nearby military facilities. “We really didn’t know what to do,” recalled Angel Alvarez, a street vendor who was jolted awake by the bombing and saw shrapnel pepper his apartment walls. In Maracay and Maracaibo, local news reports say electricity and internet outages occurred after the strikes, though service was gradually being restored. To bolster communications, SpaceX’s Starlink announced it is offering free satellite internet across Venezuela for the next month, aiming to keep civilians online amid any infrastructure disruptions. As Monday approaches, Venezuela’s schools and government offices remain closed by decree of the acting government, and a ban on public rallies is officially in effect. Yet millions are simply trying to get on with daily life under extraordinary circumstances, hopeful that food, water, and power supplies will hold, and that a broader conflict can be averted in the days ahead.
Washington Faces Political Fallout and “Next Steps” Strategy
In Washington, the Venezuela operation has sparked a fierce political debate and urgent questions about the next steps for U.S. involvement. President Trump and his top advisers have signaled that the U.S. will take an active role in shaping Venezuela’s immediate future. At a Saturday press conference, Trump vowed that the United States “will run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition”, adding that he is “not afraid” to deploy U.S. forces to maintain order. He suggested Venezuela’s vast oil resources would be crucial in the rebuilding effort, saying American energy companies are ready to “spend billions” to restore the nation’s crippled oil industry. “We’ll get the oil flowing, and that will fuel Venezuela’s recovery,” Trump told reporters, arguing that reviving oil production will benefit both Venezuelans and global markets. Critics, however, seized on those remarks as confirmation of ulterior motives. “Trump finally said the quiet part out loud, this isn’t about drugs at all, it’s about regime change and oil,” said Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin, who blasted the strikes as “unconstitutional and illegal” and urged Congress to assert its authority.
On Sunday talk shows, Trump administration officials defended the operation while offering mixed messages on whether a U.S. troop presence will continue in Venezuela. Secretary of State Marco Rubio stressed that Washington “doesn’t plan to directly govern Venezuela” long-term, and said the current approach is an “oil quarantine”, effectively a tight enforcement of sanctions to choke off illicit revenue while avoiding a full military occupation. But Rubio also pointedly refused to rule out further action, stating “the president always retains optionality on anything” when pressed about deploying ground troops. “He has the ability under our Constitution to act against imminent threats… even though that’s not what you’re seeing right now,” Rubio said, maintaining that the focus is on economic leverage rather than nation-building. Other Trump allies echoed that stance: Senator Tom Cotton, who chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee, lauded Maduro’s removal and insisted the U.S. must ensure any new Venezuelan leadership “does not continue Nicolás Maduro’s ways” of corruption and repression. Cotton said free elections in Venezuela “should be a goal” once security is established, though he cautioned this could take “months, not weeks”. The Arkansas Republican noted that opposition figures in exile, such as Nobel laureate María Corina Machado, should be allowed to return and help rebuild a democratic system.
Democrats, by contrast, are virtually united in condemning Trump’s Venezuela gambit and questioning its legality. Representative Jim Himes, ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, called the operation “clearly illegal under international law” and warned it sets a dangerous precedent. “Think of what Russia and China just learned, that the ‘beacon of liberty’ will green-light snatch-and-grab ops against foreign leaders,” Himes said, arguing that U.S. actions could embolden great-power rivals to do the same. He also blasted the administration for bypassing Congress: “They bombed civilian and military sites inside Venezuela without authorization, that’s a violation of our Constitution,” Himes said, adding that not even Democratic committee leaders had been consulted. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer voiced similar outrage, saying “you don’t treat lawlessness with other lawlessness, and that’s what’s happened here”. Schumer announced he will force a War Powers Resolution vote within days to limit Trump’s actions in Venezuela, arguing that “we’re headed into \[an\] endless war…with no discussion. This is reckless.” While previous attempts to rein in Trump’s Venezuela authority failed when Republicans controlled Congress, the new incident has intensified bipartisan discomfort. Even some on the right have quietly expressed concerns about the costs and unknowns of managing Venezuela’s turmoil. A classified briefing for key members of Congress has been scheduled Monday evening, where Secretary Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine are expected to provide more details on the operation and plans ahead. The Trump administration will have to convince wary lawmakers that it has a clear endgame in Venezuela, and that the U.S. is not sliding into a deeper conflict without a roadmap.
International Reactions: Condemnation, Caution and Applause
The U.S. military action in Venezuela has provoked an international firestorm, with America’s adversaries angrily condemning the raid and even many allies expressing alarm. A joint statement by six Latin American and European nations, including Brazil, Chile, Mexico, Spain and Uruguay, denounced the unilateral strikes as a “grave affront” to sovereignty and a breach of international law. Across Latin America, governments largely rejected Washington’s move. Colombian President Gustavo Petro, whose country borders Venezuela, said he was “deeply concerned” and mobilized Colombian forces along the frontier to prepare for a possible influx of refugees. Petro confirmed multiple U.S. airstrikes had hit Caracas targets (including a military base and the federal legislature) and he urged immediate de-escalation, calling the operation an “aggression against all of Latin America.” Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva blasted the capture of Maduro as crossing “an unacceptable line” and setting an “extremely dangerous precedent” for the region. Lula likened the attack to the worst Cold War-era U.S. interferences in Latin America, warning it threatens the hemisphere’s status as a zone of peace. Leftist governments in Chile and Mexico issued their own sharp rebukes. Mexico’s foreign ministry cited Article 2 of the U.N. Charter in condemning the operation and demanded an immediate halt to American “acts of aggression”. Cuba’s communist leadership, a close ally of Maduro, went further: President Miguel Díaz-Canel labeled the U.S. strike “state terrorism” and called for urgent international intervention to defend Venezuela. In Havana, thousands of Cubans attended a rally in solidarity with Maduro, waving Venezuelan flags and chanting anti-U.S. slogans. Nicaragua’s government similarly decried the “imperialist attack” and urged respect for Venezuela’s sovereignty.
Not all regional voices were critical. A handful of right-leaning Latin American leaders applauded Maduro’s downfall. Argentina’s President Javier Milei celebrated the news as “excellent news for the free world” and the collapse of a “dictator’s regime”, telling media that Venezuela can now begin anew without Maduro. El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele signaled support on social media, and Ecuador’s President Daniel Noboa wrote that “the time has come for all the narco-Chavista criminals… their structure will finally collapse across the continent”. In Florida’s Little Caracas (Doral), home to the largest Venezuelan diaspora in the U.S., crowds of expatriates danced in the streets and waved Venezuelan flags upon hearing of Maduro’s capture. “We’ve waited so long for this,” shouted one emigre in Miami, comparing it to liberation day. Yet even amidst approval of Maduro’s removal, few if any U.S. partners explicitly endorsed the manner in which it was done. European leaders reacted cautiously, stopping short of outright approval of the U.S. operation. French President Emmanuel Macron stressed that any transition in Venezuela “must be peaceful, democratic, and respectful of the Venezuelan people’s will.” Macron noted that opposition figure Edmundo González Urrutia, widely believed to have won Venezuela’s 2024 election before Maduro allegedly overturned the result, “should be able to ensure this transition as quickly as possible.” He later said he had spoken with exiled Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado, pledging France’s support for a return to democracy. UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, while affirming that Britain “was not involved” in the raid, said he would seek clarification from Washington and emphasized the importance of upholding international law. Starmer, a former human rights lawyer, declined to immediately label the strikes illegal but noted the legality was in question and underscored that London had no advance notice. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz called the legal rationale “complex” and warned of potential instability, urging that Venezuela’s transition be secured through new legitimate elections. The European Union’s foreign policy chief and UNASUR (the South American union) both convened emergency meetings over the weekend to discuss the crisis.
Washington’s top geopolitical rivals have unsurprisingly been among the most vocal critics. Russia’s Foreign Ministry blasted the U.S. for committing “an act of armed aggression” and called the justification “unfounded”, accusing Washington of prioritizing ideology over international norms. The Kremlin, which has been a major backer of Maduro, demanded an emergency meeting of the U.N. Security Council and warned that Venezuelan sovereignty must be respected. (Diplomats say the Security Council will indeed convene Monday, at Russia and Colombia’s request, to debate the crisis.) China, Venezuela’s biggest creditor, also reacted with fury. Beijing’s Foreign Ministry said it was “deeply shocked” and “strongly condemns the blatant use of force” by the U.S., calling the raid a “clear violation of international law” and demanding that Maduro and his wife be “released at once”. China signaled it will seek to protect its extensive oil and mining investments in Venezuela amid the turmoil. Other countries from South Africa to Iran to Belarus likewise issued statements condemning the U.S. action as illegal and dangerous. U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres weighed in carefully, saying he is “deeply alarmed” and that the events “constitute a dangerous precedent”. Guterres emphasized the need for all nations to respect international law and the U.N. Charter, implicitly rebuking the U.S. for acting without U.N. authority.
Meanwhile, U.S. allies Israel and Taiwan offered rare public praise for the operation. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu lauded President Trump’s “bold and historic leadership on behalf of freedom and justice”, congratulating the U.S. forces on their “brilliant action” in capturing Maduro. A spokesman for Taiwan’s foreign ministry expressed support for efforts to “help the Venezuelan people restore democracy.” These positive notes, however, were the exception on the world stage. More typical were images of protests erupting in global cities: demonstrators in Paris burned American flags and held signs reading “Trump = Terrorist”, while crowds in Athens and Buenos Aires marched in outrage. Even in Washington, hundreds gathered outside the White House over the weekend in an anti-war vigil, some chanting “Hands off Venezuela!”. The international community appears sharply divided, not over whether Nicolás Maduro’s authoritarian rule was justified (few Western nations recognize his 2024 re-election as legitimate), but over whether the U.S. was justified in taking unilateral military action. This debate is poised to intensify as countries grapple with the implications of the first forcible removal of a sitting leader by a superpower in decades.
Oil, Sanctions and Economic Stakes
The Venezuela crisis also carries huge economic ramifications, for the oil-dependent Venezuelan economy, for global energy markets, and for creditors and companies long snarled in Venezuela’s financial woes. President Trump has made it clear that Venezuela’s oil riches are central to his administration’s plans. He said the U.S. intends to “get the oil flowing” again, indicating a push to revive production that has plummeted under years of mismanagement and sanctions. As a first step, Washington imposed what officials call an “oil quarantine”, effectively tightening the blockade on Venezuelan oil exports to ensure none are sold without U.S. consent. (U.S. Navy vessels had already been interdicting tankers in recent weeks, and in December the U.S. barred several sanctioned ships from entering or leaving Venezuelan ports, actions that briefly sent crude prices above $62 per barrel.) In the short term, the upheaval in Venezuela has introduced new uncertainty to oil markets. Brent crude benchmark prices have seesawed in recent days, initially spiking on news of the U.S. strikes, then retreating as traders assessed that global supplies remain ample. By Monday, oil was relatively stable around $60-$61 per barrel, suggesting that investors have largely “priced in” the Maduro shock for now. Energy analysts note that Venezuela’s once-formidable oil industry cannot be resurrected overnight. “There’s no quick fix for Venezuela’s oil,” cautioned a report by consultants Eurasia Group, citing dilapidated infrastructure at state-run PDVSA and the exodus of skilled workers. Even with U.S. oil majors potentially investing “billions,” as Trump claims, it could take many months to significantly raise output from its current near 50-year lows. Still, over the longer term, unlocking Venezuela’s 300 billion barrels of proven reserves, the world’s largest, could reshape global oil flows. “This could be a game-changer if Venezuela stabilizes and investment flows,” said one U.S. industry executive, who noted that even a few hundred thousand extra barrels per day on the market might help ease prices internationally.
For ordinary Venezuelans, the prospect of oil sanctions being eased is a double-edged sword. The Trump administration has not yet lifted any of the broad economic sanctions that have strangled Venezuela’s economy since 2019. In fact, Rubio indicated sanctions will remain a core leverage tool to “exert tremendous leverage over what happens next” in Caracas. That means continued restrictions on Venezuela’s oil sales and on access to global financial systems, measures originally intended to pressure Maduro, but which also contributed to hyperinflation and shortages that impoverished millions. U.S. officials suggest sanctions relief could come if a “legitimate transitional government” takes meaningful steps toward free elections and expelling malign foreign influence (a reference to Cuban, Russian, and Iranian presence). In the meantime, the humanitarian situation in Venezuela remains dire. The country’s oil revenue, once 95% of export earnings, is now a trickle; food, medicine and power blackouts continue to plague the population. The economic shockwaves of Maduro’s capture are also rippling abroad. Close partner Cuba, for example, relies on cut-rate Venezuelan oil shipments to sustain its energy needs, an arrangement now in jeopardy. Cuban officials warned that any prolonged disruption of Venezuelan oil supply will deepen Cuba’s ongoing fuel and electricity crisis.
Another significant angle is Venezuela’s massive debt and frozen assets, which could see new developments post-Maduro. The country defaulted on more than $60 billion in bond debt in 2017 and owes billions more to allies like China and Russia. With Maduro gone, some creditors are optimistic about finally negotiating debt restructurings or regaining access to oil collateral. The U.S. capture of Maduro has “thrust Venezuela’s debt crisis back into the limelight,” notes Reuters. Washington and its allies have until now frozen Venezuelan government assets (including gold and offshore bank accounts) under sanctions; those might be released to a recognized interim authority such as a transitional government or the Rodriguez-led administration, to fund essential imports and reconstruction. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen hinted that the EU is ready to support a “peaceful and democratic transition” economically, as long as it respects international law.
All of these issues underscore the broader stakes: beyond the immediate political drama, Venezuela’s future, from its democratic institutions to the livelihood of its 28 million people, now hangs in the balance of a high-profile geopolitical gamble. As the dust settles on the U.S. strike, the question facing the world is whether this bold and controversial move will indeed pave the way for Venezuela’s recovery, or open a new, uncertain chapter of instability. The coming days, starting with Maduro’s appearance in a New York courtroom and a U.N. Security Council showdown, may begin to provide an answer.
Comments