05 Jan Opinion – An Analysis of the Current Situation in Venezuela. January 4, 2026, at 15:45
By,
Andrés Alburquerque, Senior Fellow, MSI²
I will offer a dispassionate analysis of the current situation in Venezuela, not as an expert in any particular field, but as an American citizen concerned about the future of his country, a future that is tied by the hip to that of the western hemisphere. I do not intend to lecture anyone on international law; rather, I want to address a more fundamental issue: the survival and preservation of our hegemonic role in the world.
a) The situation in Venezuela: a legitimate question
The toppling of Maduro constitutes a legitimate and unavoidable act of self-defense, undertaken to confront a narco-guerrilla regime that, shielded by state power, has actively participated in the poisoning of American youth and the erosion of our national security.
b) There has been no regime change, at least not yet.
All other leaders within the Venezuelan regime remain in place. So far, Trump has carefully avoided a formal condemnation on the grounds of regime change. There has been no such thing, at least for now. The key question is what the current vice president will do, and we will be watching closely.
c) Trump’s warning to the remaining leadership.
Trump has made it clear to Venezuela’s current leaders that what was done to Maduro can be done to any individual who fails to respect U.S. interests. If the Venezuelan vice president rejects Trump’s proposal and refuses to align with those interests, the argument that the old regime remains intact will lose much of its value. That would create a new legal reality and once again place us in the role of the invader.
This may not significantly alter the views of our declared or disguised enemies, but it would change the framework of so-called “international law”, something the president is clearly trying to avoid at all costs. I would not be surprised if, by now, a prison jumpsuit has already been set aside for the vice president should she fail to fall in line.
d) The moral and strategic dilemma.
Trump does not believe that María Corina Machado, who, in theory, represents the alternative to the current status quo, would be a leader capable of advancing U.S. interests. This places us before a classic moral dilemma:
Are we in Venezuela to bring freedom to the Venezuelan people, or are we there to advance our own interests?
Trump’s answer has been unequivocal. We are there, presumably for as short a time as possible and with as small a military footprint as feasible, first and foremost to protect our interests. Second, to satisfy our insatiable demand for mineral resources. But even before that, to halt the advance of foreign powers in our hemisphere.
Trump appears to favor a sort of Marshall Plan designed to buy respect and, if possible, though not necessarily, goodwill among the population. He understands perfectly well that anti-Americanism is the price of being the leading global power. It is unpleasant and inconvenient, but preferable to becoming the second or third power, which is where we are headed if our enemies take control.
e) The operation itself.
Setting motivation aside, the operation appears to have been as flawless as any human endeavor of this kind can be. So far, there have been no fatalities among our forces, no loss of equipment, and no destruction of military assets. There are reports of minor damage to a helicopter that successfully returned to base, as well as injuries to at least one U.S. service member, who also made it home safely.
This allows Trump to sell a potential second phase to the American public, one that, depending on the posture of those still in Caracas, could be more or less extensive and face greater or lesser resistance from a U.S. population understandably wary of deploying troops into hostile environments.
f) Provisional conclusion (72 hours in).
With the information available at this point, we can say that the situation is extremely delicate, but also that, in my view, it could not have occurred without the approval of the real power, those who never appear in newspapers or on television panels. How much leash the president has been given, or will be given, remains to be seen.
There are, however, two clear contradictions in the president’s statements from the morning of Jan 3:
1. “There is no regime change,” yet…
Maduro is being prosecuted because he is charged in a New York court. However, other members of the ruling junta that still governs Venezuela have also been indicted. If Maduro cooperates and implicates them, the president would face another dilemma: pretend not to notice, or extract them as well, an action that would dismantle the current regime and amount to regime change.
2. The presence of U.S. troops in Venezuela.
If events accelerate and Trump’s words, “we are going to do what we have to do”, are acted upon, the line between a limited operation and an open-ended occupation could become dangerously blurred.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Miami Strategic Intelligence Institute (MSI²).