Trump’s Maduro raid and the hypocrisy of the West

The world woke up on the third day of 2026 stunned by the news that the US special forces and law enforcement invaded Venezuela and captured its president Nicolás Maduro and his wife and brought them to the US. The mission was conducted in the dead of night and was completed swiftly, without a single US life lost.

The US has accused the Maduro regime of conducting narco-terrorism that threatens US security. It has imposed severe sanctions on Venezuela’s oil sector. The Trump administration has stepped up pressure on Maduro for months, including carrying out military strikes on alleged drug-carrying vessels and port facilities of Venezuela and intercepting oil tankers off the coast of the country.

Capturing Maduro is just the end of the beginning. It may take a while to digest the whole thing, but some preliminary lessons can be drawn.

First, the rules-based international order is dead.

“The strong do what they can, and the weak suffer what they must.” This famous quote from ancient Greek historian Thucydides serves as the foundation of realism in international relations. This law of the jungle was replaced by the rule of law following World War II, with the establishment of the United Nations (UN).

Venezuela does not pose a clear, credible and imminent threat to the US. One may argue that Maduro is involved in drug trafficking, but using force to get rid of him is in violation of the core principles of international law and the UN Charter.

Furthermore, the US will “run” Venezuela following Madura’s ousting until a proper transition takes place, according to Trump. This is a blatant violation of Venezuela’s sovereignty. 

To clarify how the US will “run” Venezuela, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the US would enforce an existing “oil quarantine” on Venezuela. “That means [Venezuela’s] economy will not be able to move forward until the conditions that are in the national interest of the United States and the interests of the Venezuelan people are met.” Trump reportedly warned the interim president of Venezuela, Delcy Rodríguez, that if she does not work with the US, “she is going to pay a very big price, probably bigger than Maduro”. Without a doubt, the Trump administration wants to install a government in Caracas that is subservient to US interests. 

UN secretary-general António Guterres said he was “deeply concerned that the rules of international law have not been respected” and “deeply alarmed” by the US military strikes, which set a “dangerous precedent”.

No matter how much one loathes another country or its leader, the use of force to resolve the difference is an assault on international law and order. 

Second, from the Monroe Doctrine to the “Donroe Doctrine”, no one should underestimate the US resolve to maintain its dominance in the Western Hemisphere.

Latin America is considered the US backyard, with geopolitical and geostrategic significance. For over two centuries, the Monroe Doctrine, articulated by President James Monroe in 1823, has been the foundation of US foreign policy in the Western Hemisphere. It declares Latin America to be off-limits to European colonisation and foreign intervention. 

Following the arrest of Maduro, Trump said, “The Monroe Doctrine is a big deal, but we’ve superseded it by a lot” and “They now call it the ‘Donroe Doctrine’.”

To keep Venezuela under US influence serves US interests. The South American country has 17% of global oil reserves — larger than anybody else. For a long time, at least since Hugo Chavez who served as the country’s president from 1999 to 2013, Venezuela has taken an anti-US foreign policy. And in recent years, foreign influence, particularly from Russia and China, is growing. A combination of all these makes Venezuela a ready target for the US to intervene so that the country will not stay outside of the US orbit. 

The recent episode confirms that the US is ready and willing to use force to maintain its sphere of influence in Latin America. For the US, the bottom line is that Latin American countries are led by leaders friendly to Washington and that it has access to resources in the Western Hemisphere.

Third, the Maduro case reveals Western countries’ hypocrisy as well as the enduring power and influence of the US.

Western countries have long claimed to be the standard bearers of international law and rules. When a major power has violated international law, one would expect others to take a stand and uphold international law and to oppose using force to resolve international disputes.

Yet, so far, only several fellow Latin American countries such as Colombia, Brazil and Cuba and external powers having close ties to Venezuela such as Russia and China explicitly condemned the US action. 

Protests have erupted in some countries condemning the US imperialist policy; however, most Western governments have been muted or only issued tepid statements urging de-escalation and respect for international law. Only a small number of Western countries are mildly critical of the US action. For example, Norway’s Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide said “international law is universal and binding for all states” and “The American intervention in Venezuela is not in accordance with international law”. Unsurprisingly, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu congratulated Trump for his “bold and historic leadership”. 

In contrast, if Russia or China did something similar to what happened in Caracas, an uproar from the West can be expected.

Many US allies are dissatisfied with Trump’s foreign policy. They dislike Trump’s tariffs and resent having to spend more on their national defence now. And yet, on a major matter concerning right or wrong, nobody dares to ruffle Washington’s feathers.

For those who believe the US is declining, this is a reawakening moment that the US remains a far superior military and technological power.

Finally, for small and medium countries, what happened in Venezuela is nerve-racking, and yet there is not much they can do. Already, Trump renewed his push to annex Greenland right after the Venezuela strike.

Smaller countries must strengthen themselves and work together to build an international coalition against the use of force in international affairs and reinforce the rule of law.

As great power rivalry intensifies, smaller countries must also be careful in navigating the geopolitical and geoeconomics landscape. They must be fully aware of the consequences if they decide to take sides. A better approach is to expand global engagements and build strong relations with all major powers to avoid being targeted in the future.

Trump is the king of news making. In 2026, he will likely create additional sensational events both at home and abroad as a way to boost the Republicans’ performance during the US mid-term elections. 

Looking ahead to 2027 and 2028, he will likely focus on his legacy and take more astounding, unprecedented actions to cement his place in history. The world will have to fasten its seat belt and brace for more turbulence in the next few years.

Related: What Maduro’s arrest means for China’s influence in Latin America | Has Venezuela become a test of US power — and China’s resolve? | What Trump is really after