Analysts have expressed grave concerns over the recent United States military operation in Venezuela, which culminated in airstrikes on 3 January 2026 and the capture of President Nicolás Maduro, warning that it establishes a perilous precedent for global powers.

This intervention, involving the deployment of warships, CIA operations, and the seizure of oil tankers since late 2025, has been framed by President Trump as a means to combat drug trafficking and secure Venezuelan oil resources under the Monroe Doctrine.

Critics argue that such unilateral action against a sovereign state undermines international law and could embolden adversaries like Russia and China to pursue aggressive strategies elsewhere.

The operation began with a US military build-up in the Caribbean in August 2025, escalating to strikes on suspected drug vessels and a blockade that prevented oil exports. By December, the USS Gerald R. Ford carrier group was involved, and covert CIA teams tracked Maduro, leading to his extraction by helicopter raid near Caracas, protected by drones and fighter jets.

Trump has vowed that the US will "run" Venezuela until a safe transition, with American firms poised to exploit its oil and gas reserves, prompting accusations of resource grabs from Venezuelan officials.

International reactions have been swift and divided, with Latin American nations, Russia, China, and Iran condemning the strikes as violations of sovereignty. Russia's Foreign Ministry labelled it "armed aggression," while China expressed shock at the "hegemonic acts," urging adherence to the UN Charter. 

Venezuelan Vice-President Delcy Rodríguez denounced Maduro's capture as "barbaric," though Trump claimed she was cooperating, highlighting the chaotic power vacuum.

In geopolitical commentary, experts highlight how this sets a template for Russia in Ukraine. President Putin's long-held view of Ukraine as within Moscow's sphere mirrors Trump's Monroe Doctrine application, potentially justifying Russian abductions or escalations against Ukrainian leaders like President Zelenskyy.

Fiona Hill, a former Trump advisor, noted past Russian proposals to trade Venezuela support for US concessions on Ukraine, suggesting Putin might now overlook US actions in exchange for leeway. Russian officials have already invoked international law violations in Venezuela to bolster their narrative, despite their own actions in Ukraine.

Similarly, for China and Taiwan, the Venezuela precedent lowers barriers to coercion. Legal scholar Milena Sterio warns that US blockades and strikes on "terrorist" boats could rationalise Chinese blockades or "police actions" around Taiwan, especially amid ongoing drills like "Justice Mission 2025".

Steve Tsang of SOAS China Institute observes that Beijing, viewing Taiwan as non-sovereign, might treat incursions as internal policing, emulating US claims against Venezuelan cartels. Recent Chinese coast guard entries into Taiwanese waters near Kinmen underscore this escalating assertiveness.

Chatham House analysts predict Russia will cite the US strikes to defend its Ukraine invasion, while China leverages it in Taiwan rhetoric. The Trump administration's designation of Venezuelan gangs as terrorist organisations evokes China's probes into Taiwanese figures, blurring lines between state and non-state threats.

Lucio Blanco Pitlo III notes Beijing could argue stronger historical claims over Taiwan than the US has in the Caribbean, potentially turning the South China Sea into a "Chinese lake".

Broader implications extend to spheres of influence, with Trump's Ukraine peace proposals favouring Russia now under scrutiny amid this precedent. Uncertainty over US arms commitments to Taiwan—despite $10 billion sales—amplifies fears, as Xi Jinping eyes reunification. Iranian parallels are drawn too, given Trump's threats there, but focus remains on how Venezuela normalises regime change via force.

Ongoing coverage tracks these alarms in real-time, with Latin American outcry and ally support like from Ukraine contrasting sharply. As Maduro faces charges in New York, the operation's fallout risks a cascade of escalations, where powers invoke US justification for their own interventions. Analysts urge multilateral restraint to prevent a new era of unchecked great-power adventurism.

International Agencies