U.S. Bombs Venezuela, Kidnaps President 

In a surprise operation, the U.S. captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and bombed military and civilian targets across Venezuela, leaving the future of the Latin American country uncertain.

Maduro is now headed to the United States to “stand trial on criminal charges,” said Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, after a conversation with Secretary of State Marco Rubio. In a press conference, President Donald Trump announced that the U.S. will “run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition.”

“We can’t take a chance that someone takes over Venezuela who doesn’t have the good of the people in mind,” Trump said, adding that this could include American “boots on the ground.”

The operation marks a dramatic turn of events after months of U.S.-led escalation against the Maduro regime, which included a series of attacks on drug boats and even some targets within Venezuela. Maduro’s abduction, which appears to violate international law, comes just days after the now-ousted president offered to negotiate with Washington. “I didn’t want to negotiate,” Trump told Fox News, adding that he may pursue a “second wave” of strikes if regime figures don’t cede power.

Venezuelan Vice President Delcy Rodríguez has requested that the U.S. provide proof of life for Maduro and his wife, who was also captured. Trump claimed that Rubio has spoken with Rodriguez and that she is “willing to do what we think is necessary to make Venezuela great again.”

Advocates of regime change in Venezuela have generally hoped that this year’s Nobel Peace Prize winner, María Corina Machado, would take over after Maduro. Machado, for her part, called for the installation of Edmundo Gonzalez, who is widely considered to be the legitimate winner of Venezuelan elections that took place in 2024.

In a scathing editorial, The New York Times editorial board described the attack as “latter-day imperialism.”

“By proceeding without any semblance of international legitimacy, valid legal authority or domestic endorsement, Mr. Trump risks providing justification for authoritarians in China, Russia and elsewhere who want to dominate their own neighbors,” the board wrote.

The attacks have drawn comparisons to the 1989 U.S. invasion of Panama, during which American forces captured and extradited then-President Manuel Noriega.

In the months leading up to the strikes, Congress repeatedly voted down bills that would have restricted Trump’s ability to carry out today’s attacks. The administration reportedly argued that there was no need for such a law because the administration did not intend to put boots on the ground in Venezuela.

Sen. Lee initially appeared to criticize Trump for carrying out strikes without congressional approval. But, following his conversation with Rubio, Lee argued that this operation fell under the president’s authority to protect troops from an imminent threat. (This loophole in war powers is “big enough to drive a tank through,” argued Adam Isacson of the Washington Office on Latin America, a research and advocacy group.)

Hawkish members of Congress cheered on the strikes, with some arguing that Trump should now set his sights on other left-wing authoritarians in the region. “Maduro has fallen, [Cuban President Miguel] Díaz-Canel and [Nicaraguan President Daniel] Ortega are next,” said Rep. Carlos Gimenez, R-Fla. “Our hemisphere will be the hemisphere of freedom!”

Leaders from Chile, Cuba and Colombia condemned the attacks. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said the attacks were a violation of international law and put “regional stability at great risk.” Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva called the operation “reminiscent of the worst moments of interference in Latin American and Caribbean politics.” American allies in Europe have so far largely restricted their comments to calls for de-escalation and respect for international law.

Targets of the U.S. bombing campaign reportedly included military facilities as well as a civilian port and Venezuela’s legislative palace.

The reasoning behind the Trump administration’s dramatic escalation remains unclear. Trump has often cited drug interdiction as the driving force of his campaign, but experts say that Venezuela has little to do with the crisis of overdose deaths in the U.S., which are largely caused by fentanyl from Mexico. The administration has also expressed interest in taking over Venezuela’s oil industry, which controls some of the world’s largest oil reserves.

Another explanation may be the influence of Rubio, who long advocated regime change in various Latin American countries during his time in the Senate. Coupled with the Trump administration’s focus on Latin America in its national security strategy, this would suggest that the military campaign against Maduro may be a preview of further efforts across the region.

It remains to be seen whether Trump will simply declare victory now that Maduro has been removed from office. A broader effort at regime change would likely require a more sustained U.S. military effort — one that may include a full-scale invasion, which could tip the country further into chaos. 

As of November, 70% of Americans opposed U.S. military action in Venezuela, according to a CBS News poll.