Assistance from Claude AI.
On January 3, 2026, U.S. forces executed “Operation Absolute Resolve,” capturing Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores in a pre-dawn raid on Caracas. The operation—the largest U.S. military action in Latin America since the 1989 Panama invasion—successfully extracted both targets to U.S. custody with no American fatalities. However, the absence of congressional authorization, Trump’s stated intention to “run the country,” and near-unanimous scholarly consensus that the action violates international law have triggered intense domestic and global debate. Maduro now awaits trial in Brooklyn on narco-terrorism charges while a bipartisan War Powers Resolution to halt further action advances to a Senate vote.
The raid executed with precision but left casualties unverified
President Trump authorized the operation at 10:46 PM ET on January 2, with over 150 aircraft launching from 20 bases across the Western Hemisphere. Delta Force operatives, supported by FBI Hostage Rescue Team personnel, touched down at Maduro’s compound in Fuerte Tiuna—Venezuela’s largest military complex—at approximately 2:01 AM local time on January 3.
According to General Dan Caine, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, helicopters flew at 100 feet above water to maintain tactical surprise. U.S. forces disabled Venezuelan air defenses and cut power to Caracas through electronic warfare before the assault. Maduro and Flores, asleep when the raid began, “gave up” after failing to reach a reinforced safe room. Trump stated Maduro “wasn’t able to make it to the door because our guys were so fast.”
Verified casualties and damage:
– No U.S. service members killed; several sustained non-life-threatening injuries
– One helicopter struck by ground fire but “remained flyable” and returned safely
– Venezuelan military/civilian casualties remain officially unverified—Defense Minister Padrino López confirmed deaths without providing figures; an anonymous Venezuelan official told the New York Times at least 40 were killed
– One civilian apartment complex in Catia La Mar struck, killing at least one person
By 3:29 AM ET, the extraction force was “over water” with both Maduros aboard the USS Iwo Jima. Trump announced the capture via Truth Social at 4:29 AM, posting a photo of a blindfolded Maduro in a gray tracksuit. By evening, Maduro had been transported to the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn.
The 2020 indictment forms the legal foundation
The Justice Department’s primary legal instrument is a March 2020 indictment from the Southern District of New York charging Maduro with:
– Narco-terrorism conspiracy (20-year mandatory minimum)
– Conspiracy to import cocaine (10-year mandatory minimum)
– Possession of machine guns and destructive devices
– Conspiracy to possess weapons
The indictment alleges Maduro led the “Cartel de los Soles” since 1999, conspiring with FARC to traffic 200-250 metric tons of cocaine through Venezuela annually. The State Department initially offered $15 million for Maduro’s capture, later raised to $50 million.
On January 3, 2026, the DOJ filed a superseding indictment adding Cilia Flores, Maduro’s son Nicolás Ernesto Maduro Guerra, and Tren de Aragua gang leader “Niño Guerrero” as defendants. New allegations include Flores accepting $100,000 bribes per drug flight and partnerships with the Sinaloa Cartel and Los Zetas. Maduro’s first court appearance before Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein is scheduled for January 5.
Administration claims law enforcement authority while scholars cite international law violations
The Trump administration frames the operation not as a military invasion but as law enforcement support for executing a federal arrest warrant. Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated: “At its core, this was an arrest of two indicted fugitives of American justice, and the Department of War supported the Department of Justice in that job.”
Legal justifications cited by the administration:
– Article II presidential authority to protect U.S. personnel executing the warrant
– The 1989 OLC memo by William Barr authorizing extraterritorial arrests
– The Noriega precedent (1989 Panama invasion)
– November 2025 designation of Cartel de los Soles as a Foreign Terrorist Organization
Scholarly assessment diverges sharply on domestic versus international law:
Legal scholars like Jonathan Turley (George Washington University) argue the precedent is “ample,” citing U.S. v. Alvarez-Machain (1992), where the Supreme Court held that extradition treaties don’t bar forcible arrests. The Eleventh Circuit rejected Noriega’s head-of-state immunity claims because the U.S. never recognized him as Panama’s legitimate ruler—the same argument applies to Maduro.
However, international law scholars are nearly unanimous that the operation violates UN Charter Article 2(4), which prohibits “the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.” Jack Goldsmith of Harvard Law School acknowledged: “The Venezuelan intervention pretty clearly violates the Charter, even if there are no domestic legal implications from that violation.” Zinaida Miller of Northeastern University declared it “a blatant violation” with “no defense.”
The administration’s counterargument—that this was “law enforcement” rather than “use of force”—has not persuaded independent legal analysts.
Congress was excluded, and bipartisan resistance is emerging
Congressional leaders were not notified before the operation. Trump justified this at his press conference: “Congress has a tendency to leak. It would not be good if they leaked.”
A bipartisan War Powers Resolution (S.J.Res.90) co-sponsored by Senators Tim Kaine (D-VA), Rand Paul (R-KY), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), and Adam Schiff (D-CA) will come to a floor vote the week of January 6. The resolution declares Congress has not authorized military force against Venezuela and requires termination of hostilities.
Republican supporters of the operation include House Speaker Mike Johnson, who called it “decisive and justified,” and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, who described it as “an important first step.”
Republican critics include Senator Rand Paul, who stated: “I don’t like the idea of an offensive war. I don’t like the idea of a regime change.” Representative Thomas Massie questioned: “If this action were constitutionally sound, the Attorney General wouldn’t be tweeting that they’ve arrested the President of a sovereign country and his wife for possessing guns in violation of a 1934 U.S. firearm law.” Representative Don Bacon warned the action could give Russia and China pretext to justify their own military actions against Ukraine and Taiwan.
Prior war powers resolutions against Venezuela operations failed narrowly in late 2025 on 49-51 votes, suggesting the upcoming vote will be close.
Trump announced U.S. will “run Venezuela” pending transition
At his Mar-a-Lago press conference, Trump stated: “We’re going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition.” He indicated U.S. oil companies would “go in, spend billions of dollars, fix the badly broken infrastructure” and that Venezuela would “reimburse” the United States for damages.
This statement has drawn bipartisan concern. Senate Minority Leader Schumer and House Minority Leader Jeffries issued a joint statement declaring Trump’s plan to run Venezuela “unacceptable.”
Venezuelan government response:
Vice President Delcy Rodríguez, elevated to acting president by Venezuela’s Supreme Tribunal, declared: “There is only one president in Venezuela, and his name is Nicolás Maduro Moros.” She called the operation a “kidnapping” and “complete brutal aggression,” arguing the true objective was “control of Venezuela’s energy, mineral and natural resources.”
Critical discrepancy: Trump claimed Rodríguez told Secretary Rubio “We’ll do whatever you need” and was “essentially willing to do what we think is necessary.” Rodríguez’s public statements directly contradict this claim. Her current whereabouts are unclear, with unconfirmed Fox News reports suggesting she may be in Russia.
Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello—himself named in U.S. drug trafficking indictments—appeared on state television urging calm while wearing a bulletproof vest. Defense Minister Padrino López declared a “state of external commotion” and deployed military forces nationwide.
The opposition celebrated while awaiting next steps
Opposition leader María Corina Machado, winner of the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize, declared: “Venezuelans, the time for freedom has arrived!” She called for recognition of Edmundo González Urrutia—who claims the July 2024 presidential election was stolen from him—as legitimate president and commander-in-chief.
However, Trump dismissed Machado, saying she “doesn’t have the support within or the respect within the country” to lead Venezuela and that administration had not contacted her. This creates uncertainty about transition plans given that Machado and González are the internationally recognized opposition figures.
González, in exile in Spain since September 2024, issued a statement: “These are decisive hours, know that we are ready for the great operation of the reconstruction of our nation.”
Historical precedent: the Panama operation offers partial parallels
The operation occurred exactly 36 years to the day after Manuel Noriega surrendered to U.S. forces on January 3, 1990, following Operation Just Cause. Key comparisons:
| Factor | Panama 1989 | Venezuela 2026 |
|---|---|---|
| Duration | ~3 weeks | Hours (ongoing occupation TBD) |
| U.S. forces | 27,000 troops | 150+ aircraft, special operations |
| U.S. casualties | 23 killed | 0 killed, several wounded |
| Civilian casualties | 300-3,000 (disputed) | Unverified |
| UN response | General Assembly condemned 75-20 | Security Council meeting scheduled |
| Legal basis | Self-defense, Canal Treaty | “Trump Corollary,” warrant execution |
| Target | Noriega (indicted 1988) | Maduro (indicted 2020) |
The Trump administration explicitly invoked the Monroe Doctrine, with Trump calling his interpretation the “Donroe Doctrine.” The November 2025 National Security Strategy formally announced a “Trump Corollary” asserting U.S. rights to “deny non-Hemispheric competitors the ability to position forces” in the Western Hemisphere.
Drug trafficking claims face evidentiary scrutiny
The administration justified the operation partly on drug trafficking grounds, but data complicates this narrative:
- Cocaine: Venezuela is primarily a transit country, not a producer. The DEA reports only ~8% of U.S.-bound cocaine flows through the Caribbean corridor; 74% comes via the Eastern Pacific. State Department estimates put Venezuelan cocaine transit at 200-250 metric tons annually—significant but not the primary route.
- Fentanyl: The State Department’s own March 2025 report states Mexico is “the only significant source of illicit fentanyl” affecting the United States. No DOJ indictments exist involving fentanyl trafficked from Venezuela.
The Juan Orlando Hernández pardon complicates the administration’s anti-drug framing. Trump pardoned the former Honduran president on December 1, 2025, after Hernández was sentenced to 45 years for helping traffic 400+ tons of cocaine to the U.S. in partnership with El Chapo’s Sinaloa Cartel. Representative Nancy Pelosi called the Maduro prosecution “entirely hypocritical” given this pardon.
International reaction splits along predictable lines
Condemning the operation: UN Secretary-General António Guterres called it “a dangerous precedent” and expressed deep concern that “the rules of international law have not been respected.” Brazil’s President Lula declared it “unacceptable” and evocative of “the worst moments of interference” in Latin America. China, Russia, Mexico, Cuba, and France condemned the action.
Supporting or welcoming: Argentina’s President Milei proclaimed “Freedom advances! Long live freedom!” Ecuador’s President Noboa warned “narco Chavista criminals” that “your time is coming.” Israel’s Netanyahu expressed support for “strong action.”
The UN Security Council is scheduled to convene January 5 at the request of Colombia, Russia, and China.
Key unresolved questions and factual disputes
Verified facts:
– Maduro and Flores captured and transported to Brooklyn
– No U.S. fatalities; one helicopter damaged
– 2020 indictment and 2026 superseding indictment filed
– Congress not notified in advance
– Trump stated intention to “run” Venezuela temporarily
Contested or unverified:
– Venezuelan military and civilian casualty figures (no official count)
– Whether Rodríguez agreed to cooperate with U.S. (her public statements contradict Trump’s claims)
– Exact scope of U.S. occupation plans
– Timeline for “judicious transition”
Outstanding legal questions:
– Will the War Powers Resolution pass Congress?
– Can Maduro claim head-of-state immunity? (Precedent suggests no, since U.S. doesn’t recognize him)
– What legal framework governs any U.S. occupation?
Conclusion
Operation Absolute Resolve achieved its immediate tactical objective—the capture of Nicolás Maduro—with remarkable military precision. However, the strategic and legal aftermath remains deeply uncertain. The administration’s dual framing as “law enforcement” domestically and “Trump Corollary” internationally faces challenges on both fronts: bipartisan congressional resistance to unchecked presidential war powers, and near-universal international legal condemnation. Trump’s dismissal of opposition leader Machado while announcing plans to “run” Venezuela raises questions about what “judicious transition” means in practice. With a War Powers vote imminent and Maduro’s trial approaching, the legal and political battles over this operation are just beginning.