On January 3, 2026, U.S. President Donald Trump announced a military operation in Venezuela that led to the capture of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. This operation involved airstrikes in Caracas and was framed by Trump as a necessary response to Maduro's alleged involvement in drug trafficking, specifically a narco-terrorism conspiracy linked to the Colombian guerrilla group FARC. The U.S. Justice Department had previously indicted Maduro on drug charges, asserting that he was responsible for a campaign of drug smuggling into the United States.

The military action has drawn significant criticism, particularly from Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who condemned it as a violation of international law and an example of imperialism. Sanders emphasized that such unilateral military actions should require Congressional approval, advocating for a War Powers resolution to halt the operation. He warned that this could set a dangerous precedent for other nations to engage in similar aggressive strategies to seize resources or alter governments.

In addition to Sanders, other lawmakers, including Representative Greg Casar (D-Texas) and Senator Tim Kaine (D-Va.), have called for immediate legislative action to limit military operations in Venezuela, arguing that Trump's actions are unlawful and reckless. They highlighted the historical context of U.S. interventions in Latin America, which often lead to long-term negative consequences for the affected nations.

The operation has also sparked mixed reactions among the Venezuelan diaspora in the U.S., particularly in areas like Doral, Florida, where some celebrated the military action as a potential end to Maduro's regime. However, there are concerns about the future political landscape in Venezuela and the humanitarian implications for its citizens, many of whom are already facing economic hardship and instability.

Critics have pointed out inconsistencies in U.S. drug policy, noting that while the administration pursues military action against Venezuela, it has also pardoned individuals connected to drug trafficking, raising questions about the sincerity of its commitment to combating drug-related crime. This has led to skepticism regarding the true motivations behind the military intervention, with some analysts suggesting it may be more about controlling Venezuela's oil resources than addressing drug trafficking.

Internationally, the operation has been met with condemnation from leaders in Latin America, including Colombian President Gustavo Petro, who criticized the U.S. attack as an infringement on Venezuela's sovereignty. The Progressive International, a coalition of left-leaning organizations, warned that the military action undermines regional peace efforts and threatens the principle of sovereign equality.

As the U.S. prepares to take a more active role in Venezuela, the implications for the Venezuelan people and the potential for further instability in the region remain uncertain. The need for a careful and humanitarian approach is underscored by the complex realities faced by those living under the current regime, as well as the historical patterns of U.S. intervention in Latin America that have often led to prolonged conflict and suffering.