In the early hours of January 3, authoritarian leader of Venezuela Nicolás Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores were captured by U.S. forces and brought to New York on account of narco-terrorism, conspiracy, and other charges. The world stands divided on the matter: Was Maduro’s capture necessary to protect democracy, or was it an attack on democracy? I believe there is a clear answer. Maduro was, without a doubt, a dictator, managing to stay in office for almost twelve years despite allegedly losing two elections. During his presidency, he violently cracked down on protests, killing many, and his economy and management of violence brought about the largest mass exodus in modern Latin America, as over eight million Venezuelans emigrated. It is understandable that people all over the world, Venezuelan or not, are overjoyed at the capture of Maduro from office. However, it is naive to think this is a true victory for the Venezuelan people because the action threatens democracy, sovereignty and sets precedent for a global American regime.
Interfering with Latin America has almost always been in the interest of the United States. “We’re going to run [Venezuela] until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition,” said U.S. President Donald Trump in the initial press conference detailing the incursion. President Trump not only failed to specify an objective time frame in which he would give Venezuela its sovereignty back, but it is also unclear who the United States plans to place in power. At first, Trump seemed to negate the faces of Maduro’s opposition, leaders María Corina Machado and Eduardo González in favor of Maduro’s vice president, Delcy Rodríguez. However, this tide quickly turned. “If she doesn’t do what’s right, she is going to pay a very big price, probably bigger than Maduro,” warned Trump, after Rodríguez demanded Maduro’s release and voiced her continued support of Maduro as “the only president of Venezuela.”
The treatment of Venezuelans in America in 2025 is also a fine indicator of the incentives behind the attack on Venezuela. Regardless of whether you believe removing Maduro was liberation, which many Venezuelans do, it is evident that the Trump administration and Department of Homeland Security wants to remove many Venezuelans from the U.S. Besides the outright public statements we are used to, Venezuelan nationals are now refused Temporary Protection Status (TPS), which grants asylum to foreign nationals fleeing unsafe situations in their country of origin. While the decision was challenged, the Supreme Court has allowed the termination to stand as it goes through the process of appeals. Still, it is important to note that many Venezuelans across the globe are taking to the streets to celebrate, finally free of the dictator from whom they either had to flee or survive. I applaud their persistence and share their joy, but like those who have chosen to take cover rather than celebrate, I doubt the storm has passed.
While there have been no American casualties, according to Venezuela’s interior minister, over 100 Venezuelans died in the US air raids to capture Maduro. Yet, the U.S. Department of Defense denied knowledge of any civilian casualties. Maduro and Flores will make their first court appearance on Monday, January 5. Several countries have voiced concerns, including China, Mexico, Colombia, Spain, Brazil, Chile, and Uruguay, with the latter six putting out a joint statement asserting that the actions of the U.S. have set “an extremely dangerous precedent.” Several government officials have discussed the secrecy of the attack in Venezuela and its violations of international law, as Trump did not seek Senate approval or officially declare war. Countless protests against U.S. involvement in Latin America have occurred in the past few days, in tandem with joyous celebrations of the liberation of Venezuela. Sometimes, two things can be true. Yes, it is a beautiful thing to visualize the light at the end of the tunnel, the return to one’s home. However, Venezuelans may not find the same home they remember. Trump and the US have plans for Venezuela — plans that I believe will prioritize Venezuela’s potential for profit over its people. While America’s involvement in Venezuela may have been the most efficient way to oust Maduro, I believe the needs of the Venezuelan people will not magically get prioritized. The current U.S. government has spelled out its lust for power, and if anything, the “liberation” of Venezuela is only the cherry on top. While Maduro’s capture is presented as a rightful retaliation to a threat to American sovereignty, it is, in fact, yet another demonstration of the downfall of global democracy. It actively does what the Trump administration says is the reason for the invasion: it invalidates the sovereignty of a country. The bottom line is this: the way liberation is achieved is just as important as the liberation itself, because the process in which it happens sets the stage for the operations of the government in the future. The Venezuelan people deserve the right to choose their leader and avoid American imperialism. The capture of Maduro in those four words might seem like something to celebrate for the Venezuelan people. However, when we examine the historical precedent and look to the future, it becomes clear that by swapping one dictator with another, Venezuela ultimately loses.
