The United States’ military intervention in Venezuela on January 3, 2026, was one of the most dramatic unilateral uses of force in the Western Hemisphere since the Cold War. The operation, codenamed Absolute Resolve, included synchronized airstrikes and the abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores.
This article analyzes the historical roots of US-Venezuela relations, the immediate causes of the intervention, and the broader implications for the global order.
Table of Contents
Historical Context of US–Venezuela Relations
During the 20th century, oil-based economic interdependence played a major role in shaping US-Venezuela relations. By the 1920s, the United States had become Venezuela’s main oil export market. American businesses like ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips made significant investments in the country, taking advantage of favorable investment regimes.
This relationship remained relatively steady despite times of authoritarian leadership, notably Marcos Pérez Jiménez’s dictatorship (1953-1958), demonstrating how strategic and economic objectives frequently trumped democratic concerns in US foreign policy.
The 1999 election of Hugo Chávez marked a turning point. Chávez’s “Bolivarian Revolution” questioned neoliberal economic principles and US dominance in Latin America. In 2007, his government nationalized the oil sector, driving out US businesses and aligning Venezuela with anti-US actors like Cuba and Iran.
Chávez accused Washington of supporting the failed 2002 coup against him, an accusation partially retracted by US officials but indicative of rising distrust. Diplomatic relations deteriorated further after Venezuela dismissed the US ambassador in 2008.
Deepening Crisis Under Nicolás Maduro
Following Chávez’s death in 2013, Nicolás Maduro inherited a precarious political and economic situation. His term coincided with hyperinflation, economic collapse, and contested elections, resulting in considerable domestic turmoil.
From 2014 onward, the United States issued escalating sanctions against Venezuelan officials for alleged human rights violations and corruption. While described as “targeted,” these restrictions intensified food, fuel, and medication shortages. The following humanitarian crisis sparked one of the greatest migrant movements in contemporary Latin American history, with more than seven million Venezuelans fleeing the country.
The 2019 presidential crisis escalated tensions when Washington recognized opposition leader Juan Guaidó as interim president, causing Maduro to cut diplomatic ties with the United States.
Escalation Under Trump’s Second Term
The reelection of Donald Trump in 2025 signaled a return to a brutal Venezuela policy. The administration annulled Biden-era oil concessions, slapped a 25% tariff on Venezuelan oil imports, and increased the US reward for Maduro’s capture to $50 million, declaring him a narcoterrorist tied to the Cartel of the Suns.
Washington has labeled Tren de Aragua, a transnational criminal organization based in Venezuelan prisons, as a terrorist organization. Since September 2025, US military have undertaken bombings on suspected drug-smuggling vessels in the Caribbean, which are officially portrayed as counter-narcotics operations but have been denounced globally as extrajudicial uses of force.
A large US military buildup ensued, with aircraft carriers, perhaps 15,000 personnel, and an informal oil blockade enforced by tanker seizures. Diplomatic efforts, including offers of exile for Maduro, failed. His brazen disregard of US threats became the ultimate catalyst.
Operation Absolute Resolve: What Happened?
On January 2, 2026, at 23:46 VET, President Trump approved military action without prior congressional notification, citing operational security. In the early hours of January 3, roughly 150 US aircraft, including F-22s, F-35s, and drones, attacked Venezuelan air defenses, military locations such as Fort Tiuna and La Carlota Air Base, and port facilities in Caracas and La Guaira.
The US Delta Force, with CIA intelligence backup, raided Maduro’s fortified mansion and apprehended both Maduro and Flores by 05:21 VET. They were taken to New York aboard the USS Iwo Jima and arraigned on drugs trafficking and weapons crime charges.
According to reports, victims included Venezuelan army, Cuban staff, civilians, and injured US forces. Venezuela declared a national emergency, with Vice President Delcy Rodríguez taking over interim authority.
Official US Justifications
The Trump administration presented the intervention as a law-enforcement operation backed by military action, using presidential Article II authority. It noted Maduro’s 2020 US charges for cocaine trafficking and claimed ties to transnational criminal organizations.
Strategic and economic considerations were also expressed. Trump frequently referred to the nationalizations of Venezuela in 1976 and 2007 as the “theft” of US assets, pledging reimbursement and new investment from US energy companies. The operation was presented as part of a renewed Monroe Doctrine, sometimes termed by analysts as a “Trump Corollary,” aimed at tackling migration flows, drug trafficking, and the influence of China and Russia in the hemisphere.
Implications for the Global Order and IR Students
In terms of international relations, the 2026 intervention calls into question post-Cold War rules against overt regime change and undermines the UN Charter’s principle of non-intervention.
The key analytical takeaways are as follows:
- Realism: The operation is a reflection of hemispheric dominance, power politics, and strategic resource interests.
- Liberalism: Ignoring Congress and international institutions weakens promises of rule-based order.
- Constructivism: Narratives about narcoterrorism and imperialism impact views of legitimacy.
- Hybrid Warfare: Combining airstrikes, special troops, sanctions, and legal action is a new form of coercive diplomacy.
While post-operation incentives such as oil agreements, prisoner releases, and possibly diplomatic normalization signal attempts at stabilizing, there are still concerns. Armed colectivos, fractured opposition politics, and a regional response could still destabilize Venezuela and redefine Latin American geopolitics.
Conclusion
The 2026 US invasion in Venezuela under Operation Absolute Resolve marks a watershed moment in current international relations. By combining military power, legal prosecution, economic coercion, and strategic rhetoric, the US signaled a return to overt interventionism in the Western Hemisphere, reviving hemispheric dominance ideologies long supposed to be restrained by post-Cold War norms.
From an international relations standpoint, the operation highlights the ongoing dichotomy between sovereignty and security, particularly when powerful states use transnational issues like narcotics trafficking and migration to justify unilateral action. While the US presented the intervention as a law-enforcement necessity, its scale, speed, and political consequences place it squarely in the realm of regime-change operations, raising serious concerns about the erosion of international legal restraints and multilateral decision-making.
The case also highlights the limitations of sanctions as a stand-alone instrument of policy. Prolonged economic pressure eroded Venezuela’s state capability and intensified humanitarian misery, but it did not result in a political revolution without direct force. In this sense, Operation Absolute Resolve demonstrates how sanctions, when separated from diplomacy and international consensus, may pave the way for military escalation.
FAQs
What was Operation Absolute Resolve?
Operation Absolute Resolve was a US military operation conducted on 3 January 2026 in Venezuela. It involved airstrikes and a special forces raid that resulted in the capture of President Nicolás Maduro, marking a major escalation in US–Venezuela relations.
Was the US intervention in Venezuela legal under international law?
The legality of the intervention is widely debated. Critics argue it violated Venezuela’s sovereignty and the UN Charter, while the US framed it as a law-enforcement action under domestic presidential powers.
How does Operation Absolute Resolve relate to the Monroe Doctrine?
The intervention reflects a revival of Monroe Doctrine logic, asserting US dominance in the Western Hemisphere and opposing external influence from powers such as China and Russia.