Initial Response to the January 3, 2026 US Military Attack on Venezuela

After taking my wife to the airport Saturday morning, I returned to the house to find that the United States had staged a military attack on the petro-state of Venezuela and had captured Nicolas Maduro and his wife.  My initial thoughts were of the first academic award I ever received.  It was my senior thesis at Marshall University when I wrote about the decision of the Venezuelan people to nationalize all foreign oil companies as of 1976.  I also noticed that many of my former students who had me for my Latin American Politics class which I had taught for 31 years asked me to comment on the situation.  Given that we still know very little as of January 8, here is my initial response.

In Trump’s rambling speech about the military intervention, he stated, “We are going to run the country…We’re going to have our very large US oil companies…go in…”  He stated that, “We’re not afraid of boots on the ground…” and that an occupation “won’t cost us a penny.”  He stated it would be paid for via oil revenues that we will control.  I take Trump at his word.  This should have been enough for anyone to understand that this intervention was not about drugs coming into the United States, it was about regime change, occupation, and control of Venezuelan oil.  He also did not say anything about building democracy in Venezuela.

I note that the authoritarian leader, Nicolas Maduro, a Chavista, was handpicked by Hugo Chavez to run the petro-state of Venezuela and has been “elected” through fraudulent means (see my essay https://www.theviewfrommybackyard.com/post/response-to-my-students-events-in-venezuela-part-1-background-materials).  Trump stated that Maduro’s opponent in the 2024 fraudulent elections, Nobel Prize winner Maria Corina Machado, did not have the “support within or the respect within the country” to serve as the interim President.  She clearly has the support of most of the population, but she does not have the trust of the armed forces, the internal security apparatus, the local paramilitary groups or colectivos, and petroleum executives.  Placing her in the presidency would likely destabilize the government as Chavistas would not accept her.  Trump had no real options given his limited influence and oil companies will not invest billions of dollars in a country that is politically unstable.  I also note that Machado received the Nobel Peace Prize that Trump covets so very much and he publicly expressed his anger that she was selected.  Finally, she is a very strong, independent, successful, and powerful woman who would insist on sovereignty claims for oil and minerals in Venezuela which is clearly unacceptable to Trump.  Trump also does not know how to deal with powerful women.

Instead, Trump insisted that Vice-President Delcy Rodriguez, a die-hard Chavista, was the new president and that Secretary of State Marco Rubio had spoken with her.  I note that Rodriquez, another powerful woman, is a critical member of the Maduro government, plays a major role in economic decisions concerning the oil industry, has a brother who heads the national legislature, and has extensive ties to the Venezuelan military and the thousands of colectivos that maintain the authoritarian government in power.  She went on the radio and denounced the US intervention after Trump spoke to the American people.  She was sworn in as interim president the next day, insisting that Maduro was still the President of the country.   Minister of the Interior (think internal security forces), Diosdado Cabello, stated that Trump was only partially successful with his military intervention in that he only captured Maduro.  Nothing else has changed.  The Chavistas are still in control.  While I am sure that Rubio threatened Rodriquez with another possible military intervention if she doesn’t cooperate on the issue of oil, I suspect we don’t have as much control as Trump thinks we do at this point in time and what happens next is critical.

If we are going to “run the country,” how do we gain control?  Do we send troops to the oil fields?  Do we send in troops to occupy the major cities?  These decisions are fraught with all kinds of problems that it seems we never learn.  Historically speaking we have never been very good at occupation and regime change.  In particular, US occupations in Latin America have actually turned the local population against the United States.  Perhaps more importantly will Trump supporters or Americans in general support boots on the ground?  Mark Cancian, a former Marine officer and an analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies estimated that from a doctrine point of view (the Powell Doctrine) it would take 150 to 200 thousand US troops to begin an occupation of Venezuela.  I don’t know the answers to these questions at this time, but polling suggests that even Republicans will not support this.

If the Chavistas are still in control, which is suggested by the comments of Rodriquez and Cabello, what do we look for in terms of their ability to maintain power in Venezuela?  Will the government cooperate with the United States and how far will the cooperation go?  My suspicion is that the cooperation will be very limited.  Venezuelans, no matter what party they belong, are a very proud people and will not tolerate the US running their government.  Watch the military.  We have yet to hear from military leaders.  Will it continue to support the Chavistas or turn away or will there be a split in the military? What about the internal security organizations and the local colectivos?  Will they continue to support the Chavistas or turn away?  Will opposition groups in the country cooperate with the United States despite that fact that they all oppose the illegal US claim on Venezuelan oil?  What is the US plan to “run the country?”  There is none at this point.  Only time will tell…vamos a ver.