US Attacks Venezuela and capture President Nicolas Maduro

On January 3, 2026 the United States launched military strikes on Venezuela and captured President Nicolas Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores, aimed at dismantling what the US calls a “narco-terrorist regime.”

Operation Details

● US air and special forces strikes hit military targets in Caracas (Capital of Venezuela), causing explosions and brief power outages. The US special forces captured President Nicolas Maduro and his wife and transported them by helicopter to the US Navy Ship (USS Iwo Jima) before taking them to the United States.

● Images released by the US authorities showed Maduro handcuffed and blindfolded. He is now being held in New York on charges including narco-terrorism conspiracy. US President Donald Trump announced the operation on social media, stating that the US would temporarily manage Venezuela until a safe and orderly transition takes place.

US Rationale

● The Trump administration accused Maduro of leading a “narco-state”, alleging that senior Venezuelan officials were involved in large scale drug trafficking operations that smuggled narcotics into the United States.

● The US claimed that Maduro rigged Venezuela’s 2024 presidential election to remain in power. US and several Western governments argued that the elections were neither free nor fair, suppression of opposition candidates, control over electoral institutions and restrictions on media.

● The US steadily increased pressure on Venezuela through multiple steps including expanded economic sanctions, targeting Venezuela’s oil sector, financial institutions and key individuals close to Maduro. Seizure of Venezuelan oil tankers further restricting the country’s ability to export crude and earn revenue. Military build up in the Caribbean Sea, including naval deployments and joint exercises, signaling readiness for direct action.

International Reactions

● China, Russia, Iran and Cuba strongly condemned the US military action. They described the strikes and capture of President Maduro as a clear violation of Venezuela’s sovereignty and international law.

● Several Latin American leaders warned of regional destabilisation. It could lead to civil conflict, refugee crises, and long term political instability in South America.

● The UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, warned this act sets a “dangerous precedent” that could encourage similar invasions elsewhere. International law experts have questioned the legality of capturing a sitting foreign head of state without a UN mandate or declared war.

Venezuela’s Response

● Venezuela’s Vice President Delcy Rodriguez condemned the US action and was named interim president by a Venezuelan court.

● The government declared a “state of external disturbance”, deploying soldiers and pro government militias across Caracas.

● Venezuelan authorities described the US action as a “kidnapping” and insisted the state remains functional.

● Some citizens expressed fear and uncertainty and others celebrated, hoping it marked the end of Maduro’s authoritarian rule, economic mismanagement and political repression.

Is Oil a Key Factor?

● Venezuela possesses the world’s largest oil reserves, making it one of the most resource rich countries globally. But years of poor management, sanctions and political instability have severely damaged its oil production and export capacity.

● US President Donald Trump openly stated that American oil companies would return to Venezuela to rebuild and modernise its energy infrastructure. He suggested that US involvement would be financially justified because the country’s vast oil wealth could pay for reconstruction, reinforcing the idea that oil is central to US strategic interests.

● Critics, including Venezuela’s government and international observers, argue that access to oil, not the promotion of democracy, is the real motive behind the US intervention. They claim that removing Maduro would allow the US to regain influence over Venezuela’s energy sector and counter rivals like China and Russia, which have invested heavily in Venezuelan oil.

● The situation has drawn comparisons with past US interventions, such as in Iraq and other resource rich regions where control over energy resources played a major role. These comparisons have intensified the debate over whether the action is driven by geopolitical and economic interests rather than humanitarian or democratic concerns.