With Maduro In US Custody, Is Venezuela Now A Puppet State For Trump’s Oil Empire? Experts Weigh In | World News

Venezuela Political Crisis: The United States captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores following a military operation in Caracas on January 3. This operation ended months of escalating pressure from the Trump administration, which had already authorized attacks on boats allegedly carrying drugs off the coast of Venezuela.

The couple now faces criminal charges in New York City for drug trafficking and “narco‑terrorism,” shedding light on what comes next for the Venezuelan government, its struggling economy, and its oil industry.

When asked why Washington’s relations with Caracas and tensions with Maduro have escalated so much in the past year, University of Chicago political scientist Professor Michael Albertus said Trump and Maduro are “stalwart ideological enemies” and both are “empowered radicals.” He said U.S. policy toward Venezuela is largely influenced by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and a group of Cuban-American lawmakers in Miami who have consistently opposed any cooperation with Caracas.

“Long before Trump’s re-election, the United States and Venezuela were at odds. Relations between the two countries worsened following Venezuela’s rigged elections in July 2024 and the Trump administration’s pressure campaign, which began with the bombing of alleged drug-smuggling boats and culminated in Maduro’s ouster.”

The legality of US military action is controversial. Professor Curtis Bradley, who teaches international law at the university, explained that “the use of military force against another country is not permitted under international law except in self-defense in response to an armed attack, and Venezuela did not attack the United States.”

He emphasized that conducting an operation in another country without the consent of law enforcement agencies could potentially lead to war. On whether Trump violated constitutional limits on war powers, he observed: “The Constitution gives Congress, not the president, the authority to declare war. But presidents have long asserted the right to engage in limited military operations without Congressional authorization. Ultimately, it is up to Congress to oversee the president’s use of force.”

Bradley also emphasized that the United States could continue to prosecute Maduro under drug laws even if his capture was technically illegal. “The fact that the United States may have unlawfully detained Maduro would not be a defense to his prosecution in the United States,” he said, adding that any immunity defense was unlikely to succeed because he is the de facto head of state of Venezuela.

Comparisons with historical US operations help explain the significance of the Venezuela attack. Professor Albertus likened Maduro’s capture to the 1989 ouster by the United States of Panama’s military leader Manuel Noriega, who was extradited to US courts and convicted of drug trafficking and money laundering.

However, the two events have differences.

“Noriega’s removal required American Marines in the field and took weeks. The American government then helped install a democratic government. In Venezuela, the United States has so far disdained democratic opposition,” he explained.

Looking ahead, Venezuela’s future is uncertain. “The United States now claims to ‘govern’ Venezuela, which means issuing directives and ultimatums backed by the threat of force,” he said, adding that Washington had tried to position Vice President Delcy Rodríguez as transitional leader, but the country’s top officials were in place and the democratic opposition continued to advocate for change.

Professor Paul Poast, who teaches international relations at the university, said that while Trump’s comments about governing Venezuela attracted attention, Rubio quickly began to tone down the comments by describing the US’s role in guiding and pressuring Rodriguez’s transitional government.

The Trump administration also raised expectations for Venezuelan oil and claimed that US companies could immediately begin rebuilding infrastructure. But energy economics expert Professor Ryan Kellogg warned the sector was in disrepair.

“Venezuela was producing about 3 million barrels of crude oil per day, but due to lack of investment and maintenance, production fell below 1 million barrels,” he said, stressing that large investments would be required to repair pipelines, processing units and ports, and that private companies were unlikely to commit without political stability.

He said even if Venezuela’s oil sector was rebuilt, the impact on global prices would be minimal. “Such an investment would take decades. We won’t see a new gush of crude oil anytime soon. Venezuela is the only country producing over 100 million barrels of oil per day on the global market. Even a gradual doubling of production would move prices by only a few dollars per barrel.”

The US military operation in Caracas also raises larger questions about how the US conducts its foreign policy in Latin America.

Poast described Trump’s approach as a modern extension of the Monroe Doctrine, which he and his team refer to as the “Trump Corollary” or the “Donroe Doctrine.” He said the United States has dominated the hemisphere with a willingness to exert force that has rarely been seen in recent years.

He added that the operation could encourage Trump to act elsewhere in the region, but that any moves against NATO allies appeared unlikely. He also said there could be conflicts between the president’s goal of keeping the United States the “indispensable nation” and his goal of allowing Russia and China some freedom in their own regions.

Caracas stands at a dangerous crossroads, with Maduro on trial in New York and Washington signaling an active role in Venezuela’s governance. The coming months will determine whether U.S. interventions will change Venezuela’s political situation, affect its energy sector, and set an example for 21st-century American foreign policy in Latin America.