Table of Contents
On January 3, U.S. airstrikes targeted Caracas, the capital of Venezuela. In the aftermath, President Donald Trump announced the capture of Nicolás Maduro and his spouse, Cilia Flores. The U.S. government has charged both with serious offenses, including narcoterrorism, cocaine trafficking, and illegal possession of arms, with plans to bring them to trial in American courts.
The Russian Foreign Ministry responded swiftly by condemning the U.S. intervention. They labeled it an act of armed aggression against Venezuela. Officials criticized what they described as ideologically driven hostility, arguing that it has replaced more pragmatic diplomatic efforts. Their statements highlighted a perceived violation of Venezuela’s sovereignty, which they assert is fundamental to international law.
International reactions
As tensions escalated, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov conversed with Delcy Rodríguez, vice president of Venezuela, emphasizing solidarity and a commitment to enhancing the strategic partnership between Russia and Venezuela. Following this dialogue, the Russian government reiterated its call for the United States to reconsider its actions and demanded the return of the democratically elected president and his wife.
Ukrainian stance
In response, Ukraine’s Foreign Minister, Andrii Sybiha, used social media to criticize Maduro’s regime, claiming it has violated human rights and the principle of self-determination for nations. He stressed that the people of Venezuela deserve a future characterized by security, prosperity, and human dignity, reaffirming Ukraine’s non-recognition of Maduro’s legitimacy. This perspective is consistent with Ukraine’s historical opposition to regimes that undermine democratic values.
Venezuelan government response
In Caracas, the Venezuelan government condemned the U.S. military operation, labeling it an imperialist attack aimed at civilian and military sites. Vice President Delcy Rodríguez emerged as a staunch supporter of Nicolás Maduro, affirming his position as the legitimate president of Venezuela and demanding his immediate release. During a televised address, she asserted, “There is only one president in Venezuela, and his name is Nicolás Maduro Moros,” while dismissing any suggestions of her assuming power.
Political implications
Rodríguez’s recent announcement raised eyebrows as it lacked any mention of a transitional government. This omission has sparked concerns about her leadership legitimacy amid the current extraordinary circumstances. Opposition leaders, such as María Corina Machado, have called for Edmundo González to assume power, arguing that his victory in the presidential election gives him a rightful claim. According to the Venezuelan Constitution, a new election is required within a month if the president is unable to serve. However, the legitimacy of this rule is under intense scrutiny, especially considering the implications of foreign intervention.
Future of U.S.-Venezuela relations
U.S. signals support for Venezuela amid political turmoil
The administration of former President Donald Trump has indicated a willingness to assist in the governance of Venezuela during its ongoing crisis. However, there have been no immediate actions reported to support this claim. Venezuelan state media continues to air pro-Maduro messages, featuring images of supporters protesting against U.S. intervention.
During a press conference, Trump stated that the operation should act as a warning to those endangering American interests. He also hinted at plans to revitalize the country’s oil sector and improve its access to international markets.
The situation in Venezuela represents a notable escalation in U.S. foreign policy and military involvement, drawing parallels to past interventions aimed at regime change. As developments unfold, the international community is closely monitoring the potential impacts of this significant move on Venezuela’s political landscape and its global relations.