Trump’s shadow war in Venezuela grows, but country’s strongman leader still clings to power | Venezuela
Almost a week after Donald Trump first announced what he said was the first US ground strike in a four-month military pressure campaign against Venezuela, details on the ground remain thin.
CNN and the New York Times reported late Monday that they had confirmed that the CIA used a drone to target a “port facility” allegedly used by the Tren de Aragua street gang. While there was no loss of life in the attack, the date, time and place of the attack are unknown. Venezuela’s dictator leader Nicolás Maduro and his government have remained silent.
If confirmed, the first strike on land would mark a new phase in the campaign, which has seen a massive US naval fleet deployed since August, air strikes that have killed 107 people so far, a “total blockade” of sanctioned oil tankers, the seizure of two ships and the pursuit of a third.
Independent organizations, activists and analysts in Venezuela have so far been unable to find details of the attack.
Whether or not the strike occurs, analysts agree that Trump’s statement marks his latest move in the shadow war aimed at removing Maduro from power.
“Obviously, the United States doesn’t want to call this a war because that would trigger congressional oversight… but it’s a war, people are dying, and they’re dying very clearly and loudly with air strikes on boats,” said Alejandro Velasco, a historian of modern Venezuela and a professor at New York University.
He added that Maduro is also waging his own war to stay in power: “That’s the only thing he and those around him are worried about. To them, the war is about how to survive another day.”
Christopher Sabatini, senior fellow for Latin America at Chatham House, said the United States is already waging a psychological intervention campaign against Venezuela: “This is not yet a war that involves a huge amount of weapons, because I don’t think either side has the guts to do it… So it’s more of a war of moving the pieces and hoping one side will buy in.”
He said this logic lies behind all of Trump’s moves to date, from military reinforcements to attacks on boats and the seizure of oil tankers.
“Trump’s whole plan is based on the idea of someone in Maduro’s inner circle leaving and saying, ‘Maduro, you’re leaving and we’re forming a new government.’ The US has doubled down on this strategy with every step it’s taken, even though it didn’t work,” he added.
The first attack on the alleged land would be Trump’s last attempt at this strategy, Sabatini said.
Andrés Antillano, a professor of criminology at the Central University of Venezuela, said it was “unlikely” that the strike would destroy any significant drug infrastructure.
He is among several experts on Venezuelan drug trafficking who note that, despite early U.S. claims that the military crackdown was part of the so-called “war on drugs,” the country plays a relatively minor role in global cocaine trafficking and is certainly not responsible for the most significant volumes reaching the United States.
“There is an exaggeration about the Tren de Aragua, which was actually quite weakened and fragmented… If the attack really happened, it might have hit a small fishing village from where speedboats carrying cocaine depart,” Antillano said.
Antillano noted that the incident “may have occurred in an isolated place, so nothing is known,” adding that the Maduro regime may not want to admit the attack. Venezuela spent weeks commenting on deadly airstrikes in the Caribbean, initially claiming the footage was fake.
“In any case, even if everything Trump said was true, it still seems to me to be an attack with minimal impact, despite the media coverage. That’s more or less what happened with the airstrikes on boats: they probably led to the deaths of fishermen, some of whom were linked to drug trafficking, but they had no impact on drug trafficking and did not shake the foundations of Maduro’s government,” he added.
