The ‘Putinization’ of US foreign policy has arrived in Venezuela | Venezuela

Almost no one expected 2026 to be the year of peace, and it had only been two days since the worst fears were confirmed.

Overnight attacks on Venezuela, the kidnapping of its leader Nicolás Maduro and his wife, and Donald Trump’s announcement that the United States will “govern” the country and sell its oil have forced another truck into international law and global norms. But that’s not even the most worrying thing about the matter.

Since taking office almost a year ago, Donald Trump has been driving convoys of bulldozers through this increasingly fragile structure, and much of it is now just rubble. The night’s events were preceded by air strikes on small boats off the coast of Central America, killings of crew based on unproven allegations of drug trafficking, and armed seizures of Venezuelan oil tankers on the high seas. It is not yet known how many people were killed in Maduro’s capture early on Saturday.

The worst part about Maduro’s comment, in terms of global stability, was that it worked.

Trump’s belief in global omnipotence and his desire to seize other countries’ land and natural resources have so far been kept in check by fear of involvement in foreign wars. He claimed (incorrectly) to have ended eight wars, and his biggest ambition in 2025 appeared to be winning the Nobel peace prize. Less than a month ago he was holding the Fifa peace prize, a hastily prepared replacement. This act of self-deprecation by world football’s governing body looks even more absurd than when Trump took the gold medal and put it around his neck.

Trump’s anxiety about foreign wars appears to be waning. He was clearly excited by the drama of the Maduro operation and the efficiency of the American soldiers carrying it out, and declared on Saturday that he was “not afraid” to deploy ground forces to Venezuela to pursue his own interests. The ever more stringent embrace of military power is a worrying development for an aging president who has become more temperamental, irascible and incoherent with each day in office, who is facing a waning popularity and who is trying desperately to divert attention from the Epstein child-trafficking scandal.

On Saturday morning, Trump appeared excited about military success. “A lot of good planning, a lot of great troops and great people,” Trump told the New York Times. “It was actually a great operation.”

The attack on Venezuela shows that the allure of foreign lands, oil and minerals now shines brighter than the Nobel prize.

It was left mostly to others in the Trump administration to frame the attack in legalese and argue that Maduro had been “brought to justice.” The Venezuelan leader was accused of corruption, drug trafficking and other crimes in the United States at the end of Trump’s first term.

Maduro is a dictator who has ruled an authoritarian state since 2013 with the help of elections widely considered fraudulent. But the specific drug allegations made against him by the United States are viewed by most experts as flimsy and do not represent convincing justifications under international or U.S. law for the attack on Venezuela and the kidnapping of Maduro. In repeated statements, Trump has made clear that he is greedy for Venezuelan oil rather than a desire to put Maduro on trial or bring democracy to the Venezuelan people.

Hours after ousting Maduro, Trump said the United States was ready to take action to fix Venezuela’s battered, sanctions-ravaged oil industry. “We will sell large amounts of oil,” he said.

The international laws and norms that Trump is enforcing have already been relaxed by previous US administrations. The operation is very similar to the 1990 invasion of Panama and the forced surrender of the first Bush administration dictator.

This was followed by the young George Bush’s invasion of Iraq on false grounds and his administration’s widespread use of torture. Barack Obama failed to hold his predecessor’s administration accountable and continued his own legally dubious drone assassination campaign against suspected terrorists.

These are isolated acts of hypocrisy by previous presidents who claimed exceptions to international law to benefit the United States, but often embraced global norms with the knowledge that the “rules-based system” overwhelmingly favored America.

Trump completely disdains this system. He looks at the world through the eyes of a 19th century imperialist but with the weapons of the 21st century.

It’s unclear how far Trump plans to go in Venezuela to advance his goals, but he made clear on Saturday that the “American armada” will remain poised in the region “until the demands of the United States are met and fully met;” these demands would likely include the takeover of Venezuela’s oil industry.

Trump said Maduro’s deputy, Delcy Rodríguez, is ready to cooperate with Washington and should have other people in mind. It is unclear whether Maduro’s supporters have the capacity or will to resist a US takeover, or whether any rebel groups will seize the opportunity to act. A calm outcome seems a remote possibility.

What unfolds overnight in Venezuela will cause immediate concern in governments such as Iran and Denmark, where Trump has expressed a desire to take radical action.

In recent days, Trump has said the United States will defend Iranian anti-government protesters and threatened officials to seize control of Greenland by any means necessary. Last month, the Danish Defense Intelligence Service labeled the United States a security risk; This was a statement that would have been unthinkable not so long ago for a NATO ally.

At a press conference on Saturday, Trump added Cuba to his list of target countries, arguing that the country was “very similar to Venezuela in the sense that we want to help people in Cuba.” Secretary of State Marco Rubio added that Havana should be “concerned” following the events in Venezuela.

It accelerates the transition from a mostly rules-based world to one of competing spheres of influence that will be determined by armed force and the readiness to use it. US commentator David Rothkopf called this the “Putinisation of US foreign policy”.

Russian commentators have often suggested that Latin America is within America’s sphere of influence, just as Ukraine is under Russia’s shadow. Vladimir Putin thinks the same about most of Eastern Europe. Xi Jinping will draw his own conclusions.

The danger that has been brutally revealed in the first few days of 2026 is a danger that everyone will eventually face.