The Line Washington Finally Crossed in Venezuela

By Sean Hart
January 3, 2026

Before dawn on January 3, the United States did something it has spent decades insisting it does not do. President Donald Trump said U.S. forces carried out large-scale military strikes inside Venezuela and removed President Nicolás Maduro from the country, a claim that, if confirmed, would mark the most consequential American intervention in Latin America since the 1989 invasion of Panama.

Trump said Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, were captured and flown out of Venezuela and now face U.S. criminal charges tied to narcotics trafficking and terrorism. Venezuelan officials said hours later that they could not confirm the president’s whereabouts, an absence of information that quickly became as destabilizing as the strikes themselves.

What Happened

Trump announced in the early morning hours that the United States had conducted what he described as a large-scale strike against Venezuela and taken Maduro and Flores into custody. Witnesses in Caracas reported explosions, low-flying aircraft, and fireballs lighting the night sky as strikes hit military installations and sites near the capital’s airport, according to multiple news organizations. Those accounts could not be independently verified.

U.S. officials briefed on the operation said elite American forces executed the raid in coordination with federal law enforcement agencies and completed the mission in less than an hour. The speed and precision suggested months of preparation, even as public confirmation came only after the operation was already over.

The U.S. Case Against Maduro

The Trump administration framed the operation not as regime change but as the execution of long-standing U.S. indictments. Federal prosecutors have accused Maduro for years of narco-terrorism and large-scale cocaine trafficking into the United States, portraying him less as a sovereign leader than as a criminal figure shielded by the state.

Washington had previously offered rewards ranging from $15 million to $50 million for information leading to Maduro’s arrest, signaling that the legal theory behind the operation had been in place long before the decision to act on it. Officials familiar with the discussions said Maduro would be brought to the United States to stand trial in federal court in New York, though Venezuelan authorities demanded proof of life and rejected the legality of the seizure.

Caracas Reaction and Regional Shock

Venezuela’s government denounced the strikes as an imperialist attack and declared a national emergency. Vice President Delcy Rodríguez said officials did not know where Maduro or the first lady were being held and urged supporters to mobilize, while the government claimed civilian and military casualties without releasing verified figures.

Across Latin America, governments responded cautiously. Some warned that the operation set a dangerous precedent for the extraterritorial removal of a sitting head of state. Others, including U.S. allies, expressed quiet relief at the prospect of an end to the Maduro era while preparing for refugee flows and political instability along Venezuela’s borders.

Why This Moment Is Different

The operation capped months of escalating U.S. pressure that included naval deployments Trump described as the largest ever assembled in South American waters, as well as maritime interdictions and covert actions against suspected drug-trafficking networks. Unlike sanctions or diplomatic isolation, this was overt kinetic action on Venezuelan soil with the explicit goal of seizing a sitting president.

In collapsing the distinction between counter-narcotics enforcement, counterterrorism, and regime change, Washington accepted legal and political risks it has historically preferred to manage at a distance, leaving unresolved questions about presidential war powers and the use of force without explicit congressional authorization.

Three Trajectories From Here

Managed Transition

Venezuela could see the emergence of an interim government led by Vice President Delcy Rodríguez or opposition figures under intense international mediation. Early elections and guarantees to entrenched elites might contain violence, but legitimacy would remain fragile and contested.

Fragmentation and Insurgency

Security forces, colectivos, and pro-Maduro factions could splinter, with some rejecting any successor authority and turning to guerrilla tactics. The result would likely be a prolonged, low-intensity conflict spilling across borders and drawing sustained U.S. and regional involvement.

Authoritarian Reconstitution

A hard-line civilian or military successor could consolidate emergency powers under the banner of defending sovereignty against U.S. aggression, using nationalist outrage to justify renewed repression. The regime would change its face while preserving its core logic.

Historical Echo and Likely Response

The closest historical parallel is the 1989 U.S. invasion of Panama and the seizure of Manuel Noriega, another strongman indicted on drug charges. But Venezuela is larger, more polarized, and far more entangled in global energy markets and great-power politics than Panama ever was.

As in Panama, Washington is betting that treating a leader as a criminal defendant will succeed where diplomacy failed. History suggests the decisive phase will not be the raid itself, but the aftermath, a chapter the United States has repeatedly struggled to shape on its own terms.

Sources and Reporting Basis

This article is based on contemporaneous reporting and live updates from CBS News, Reuters, ABC News, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Fox News, Al Jazeera, BBC News, and NHK World-Japan, as well as public statements from U.S. and Venezuelan officials. Several details, including casualty figures and the precise location of Nicolás Maduro and Cilia Flores, could not be independently verified at the time of publication.