It is becoming increasingly clear that Trump is moving toward regime change in Venezuela. What comes next could be even worse.
President Donald Trump's “maximum pressure” strategy toward Nicolás Maduro’s government in Venezuela has been his stance for quite some time — imposing crushing sanctions on the country during his first term — but in recent days, the administration has significantly raised the stakes.
The Caribbean currently hosts an astonishing concentration of U.S. naval and air forces, including four Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, a guided-missile cruiser, an attack submarine, a Marine Amphibious Ready Group, and a squadron of F-35 multirole fighter jets.
These ships and aircraft are officially deployed as part of an anti-narcotics operation, but the scale of military power assembled for what is normally a relatively routine mission has fueled widespread suspicion in both the U.S. and Venezuela that a military intervention against the Bolivarian Republic is likely.
Maduro recently sent a letter to the United Nations, stating that he expects an “armed attack” against his country “in the very near future.”
Secret lethal operations
Concerns have likely intensified with the creation last week of a new Joint Task Force at SOUTHCOM, again officially for an anti-narcotics mission, under the II Marine Expeditionary Force — precisely the type of unit that would be deployed in a military intervention in Venezuela.
Nor would the recent New York Times report stating that Trump has authorized secret lethal operations by U.S. intelligence agencies within Venezuelan borders have reassured Maduro.
The U.S. administration has made its interest in removing Maduro clear: it views him as the head of a narco-terrorist organization responsible for exporting crime, drugs, and illegal migrants to the United States.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio has declared that Maduro is not the legitimate president of the country due to the apparent fraud in the 2024 elections, while the Department of Justice has doubled the reward for his capture to $50 million.
Abuse of Office
However, despite Maduro being indisputably abusive of presidential authority and a tyrannical dictator, he remains the president and head of state of Venezuela.
Ideological attacks on the “sacredness of democracy” will not remove him from power or render his government inactive — much like American disapproval of the Chinese Communist Party does not democratize China, a fact both sides fully understand.
Removing Maduro will require more than sanctions, threats, or pressure: it will require war, and this likelihood appears to be growing over time.
While the collapse of Maduro’s dictatorship would certainly be beneficial for the people of Venezuela, an intervention carries significant risks and costs, which U.S. policymakers must carefully weigh against the potential benefits.
In geopolitics, there is no free lunch.
An invasion in preparation
The most obvious costs concern the initial invasion. The U.S. invasion of Panama in 1989 to overthrow General Manuel Noriega involved approximately 27,000 American troops, 23 of whom were killed, with hundreds more wounded.
Venezuela is far larger than Panama, and although its military is poorly equipped, it is also far larger than the forces available to Noriega.
The Center for Strategic and International Studies estimates that an invasion of Venezuela would require nearly 50,000 troops, some of whom would never return home.
But the real dangers of such an operation emerge after the invasion. Overthrowing Maduro’s government is one thing, but occupying and rebuilding the country is another matter entirely.
While Venezuela is not Afghanistan — it has a relatively unified society, an organized opposition, and a prominent leader, María Corina Machado, capable of assuming government leadership — there are serious challenges any succeeding government would face.
The role of the cartels
The greatest risk is the drug cartels operating in the region. While Maduro strategically allows cartels to operate within Venezuela, the country does not have the entrenched cartels of neighboring Colombia.
The cartels operate networks that move drugs through Venezuela to the U.S. and elsewhere, but they control few territories and produce little locally.
However, if a U.S. invasion occurs, law enforcement restrictions on cartel activity in Venezuela would vanish immediately. This could lead to an explosive expansion of cartel power in rural areas, especially in the Amazon and border regions with Colombia.
Additionally, cartels could pose as anti-imperialist resistance movements, absorbing segments of Maduro’s support, thereby strengthening their position in the country.
The U.S. intervention in Venezuela is not a decision to be taken lightly. The consequences could extend far beyond Venezuela, affecting regional stability and U.S. geopolitical strategy for many years.
www.bankingnews.gr
The Caribbean currently hosts an astonishing concentration of U.S. naval and air forces, including four Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, a guided-missile cruiser, an attack submarine, a Marine Amphibious Ready Group, and a squadron of F-35 multirole fighter jets.
These ships and aircraft are officially deployed as part of an anti-narcotics operation, but the scale of military power assembled for what is normally a relatively routine mission has fueled widespread suspicion in both the U.S. and Venezuela that a military intervention against the Bolivarian Republic is likely.
Maduro recently sent a letter to the United Nations, stating that he expects an “armed attack” against his country “in the very near future.”
Secret lethal operations
Concerns have likely intensified with the creation last week of a new Joint Task Force at SOUTHCOM, again officially for an anti-narcotics mission, under the II Marine Expeditionary Force — precisely the type of unit that would be deployed in a military intervention in Venezuela.
Nor would the recent New York Times report stating that Trump has authorized secret lethal operations by U.S. intelligence agencies within Venezuelan borders have reassured Maduro.
The U.S. administration has made its interest in removing Maduro clear: it views him as the head of a narco-terrorist organization responsible for exporting crime, drugs, and illegal migrants to the United States.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio has declared that Maduro is not the legitimate president of the country due to the apparent fraud in the 2024 elections, while the Department of Justice has doubled the reward for his capture to $50 million.
Abuse of Office
However, despite Maduro being indisputably abusive of presidential authority and a tyrannical dictator, he remains the president and head of state of Venezuela.
Ideological attacks on the “sacredness of democracy” will not remove him from power or render his government inactive — much like American disapproval of the Chinese Communist Party does not democratize China, a fact both sides fully understand.
Removing Maduro will require more than sanctions, threats, or pressure: it will require war, and this likelihood appears to be growing over time.
While the collapse of Maduro’s dictatorship would certainly be beneficial for the people of Venezuela, an intervention carries significant risks and costs, which U.S. policymakers must carefully weigh against the potential benefits.
In geopolitics, there is no free lunch.
An invasion in preparation
The most obvious costs concern the initial invasion. The U.S. invasion of Panama in 1989 to overthrow General Manuel Noriega involved approximately 27,000 American troops, 23 of whom were killed, with hundreds more wounded.
Venezuela is far larger than Panama, and although its military is poorly equipped, it is also far larger than the forces available to Noriega.
The Center for Strategic and International Studies estimates that an invasion of Venezuela would require nearly 50,000 troops, some of whom would never return home.
But the real dangers of such an operation emerge after the invasion. Overthrowing Maduro’s government is one thing, but occupying and rebuilding the country is another matter entirely.
While Venezuela is not Afghanistan — it has a relatively unified society, an organized opposition, and a prominent leader, María Corina Machado, capable of assuming government leadership — there are serious challenges any succeeding government would face.
The role of the cartels
The greatest risk is the drug cartels operating in the region. While Maduro strategically allows cartels to operate within Venezuela, the country does not have the entrenched cartels of neighboring Colombia.
The cartels operate networks that move drugs through Venezuela to the U.S. and elsewhere, but they control few territories and produce little locally.
However, if a U.S. invasion occurs, law enforcement restrictions on cartel activity in Venezuela would vanish immediately. This could lead to an explosive expansion of cartel power in rural areas, especially in the Amazon and border regions with Colombia.
Additionally, cartels could pose as anti-imperialist resistance movements, absorbing segments of Maduro’s support, thereby strengthening their position in the country.
The U.S. intervention in Venezuela is not a decision to be taken lightly. The consequences could extend far beyond Venezuela, affecting regional stability and U.S. geopolitical strategy for many years.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών