Sharper: Venezuela

In the early hours of January 3, U.S. forces struck a series of targets in Venezuela and carried out the apprehension and extraction of Venezuelan President Nicholas Maduro. A marked departure from decades of nonintervention in Latin America, this unprecedented operation was undertaken by an administration that seeks to prioritize the Western Hemisphere, which is demonstrated by the evocation and revitalization of the 200-year-old Monroe Doctrine with the Trump corollary. Maduro’s removal raises questions about the scope of the intervention, its legal justification, and what role the United States will play in the future of Venezuela. In this edition of Sharper, CNAS experts analyze the operation, its ramifications, and what it means for America’s role in the world. Continue reading to learn more.

Features

Commentary | Trump's Audacious Success

With President Maduro of Venezuela in U.S. custody, questions remain about the future of the country. In a press conference, President Trump insisted that the United States would “run” Venezuela, yet with no U.S. forces still in the country, and the regime, albeit without its leader, still in place, the future of Venezuela remains in flux. In The Atlantic, Richard Fontaine writes, “the welcome fall of Maduro is not the end. It is not the beginning of the end. It is only the end of the beginning.”

Brussels Sprouts | The Donroe Doctrine? Venezuela, Greenland, and America’s New Agenda

The operation and Washington’s posture have sent shockwaves through America’s allies, as concerns among U.S. allies and partners rise about the resilience of international law and the risk that the world is moving toward a global order based on spheres of influence, where might makes right and authoritarian states like Russia and China sense a freer hand within their respective regions. The Trump administration’s comments about Greenland are putting additional stress on transatlantic relations, with the Danish prime minister making clear that any U.S. attack on Greenland would end the NATO alliance. To discuss Venezuela, Greenland, and the geopolitical implications of a seismic week in U.S. foreign policy, historian and author Lawrence Freedman and Shashank Joshi of The Economist join Brussels Sprouts.

Watch It Again | The Boat Strikes: Drug Trafficking, Military Engagement, and the Law

Before the events of January 3, the United States had exerted significant pressure on the Maduro regime. With longstanding sanctions still in place, the United States expanded a blockade of Venezuelan oil and began a series of lethal strikes against boats suspected of carrying drugs. The strikes, which began in the Caribbean and later expanded to the eastern Pacific, have killed 115 people and raised legal questions about the use of force. In December, CNAS hosted a panel discussion on the legality of the Venezuelan boat strikes and the limits of executive authority.

Watch | Carrie Cordero on the U.S. Intervention in Venezuela

In the lead-up to the operation in Venezuela, U.S. officials had frequently tied the escalating pressure on Maduro and the Venezuelan regime to the Trump administration's efforts to combat the flow of drugs into the United States. Yet, as Carrie Cordero, CNAS’s expert on national security law, points out on CNN, the president has repeatedly focused his justifications on oil. President Trump argues that the intervention will allow U.S. oil companies to re-enter Venezuela after decades of decreasing exports due to the nationalization of oil infrastructure and U.S. sanctions. Watch as she unpacks the administration’s justifications and what comes next.

In the News

Insights from Richard Fontaine, Carlton Haelig, Chris Kennedy, Rachel Ziemba, and Anthony Vinci