The unprecedented kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, a truly unique event in world history, constitutes not only a military intervention in a sovereign and independent country, violating the principles of international law, but also serves as a clear warning to the entire planet and to every insubordinate leader worldwide.
On January 3, 2026, during a press conference concerning the military operation and Maduro’s arrest, US President Donald Trump issued threats against Colombian President Gustavo Petro, stating: “He would do well to be careful.”
Simultaneously, the US president hinted that Cuba might become a topic within broader US policy discussions in the region, highlighting Washington’s ability to expand its focus beyond Venezuela.
US Senator Marco Rubio even said that the Cuban government should be worried after Maduro’s arrest. Specifically, he stated: “If I lived in Havana and were a member of the government, I would at least be worried,” adding that “Cuba is a disaster” and that the country is “run by incompetent and depraved men.”
The history of the United States, moreover, is characterized by extensive imperialist interventions, both territorial and in the internal affairs of other countries. Specifically, there have been approximately 400 interventions since 1776, when the Second Continental Congress adopted the Declaration of Independence on July 4, declaring the independence of the 13 American Colonies from the British Empire—an event that marked the official founding of the United States of America.
Who can forget that from April 15 to 19, 1961, 1,400 anti-Fidel Castro fighters, trained and financed by the CIA, attempted to land at the Bay of Pigs, 250 kilometers from Havana, but failed to overthrow the Cuban communist regime. These battles resulted in the deaths of approximately one hundred people on each side.
“With Salvador Allende winning the elections on September 4, 1970, in Chile, and with Fidel Castro already established in Cuba, we will have a Red sandwich in Latin America that will inevitably turn entirely Red,” Richard Nixon feared, and his apprehension was soon confirmed by the election results.
So, in the face of this unpleasant reality for the United States, a solution had to be found. And the solution emerged on the morning of September 11, 1973, when a military coup took place, led by the head of the army, General Augusto Pinochet, with the support of the United States, as well as Brazil, whose military regime was entirely friendly and cooperative with the United States. The coup plotters first surrounded and bombed the Presidential Palace, then stormed it. Salvador Allende and his close associates were killed after fierce resistance.
The United States also invaded Panama in mid-December 1989 during the presidency of George H.W. Bush. The purpose of the military invasion was to oust Panama’s de facto leader, General Manuel Noriega, who was accused by American authorities of extortion and drug trafficking.
So, if one seeks a historical parallel for the US arresting a de facto leader of a country and transferring him to the US for trial, the Noriega case stands as the most characteristic example. This occurred after a regular military invasion, within the context of a coordinated armed intervention, and certainly not during a period of “normal” peace.
Noriega managed to escape and took refuge in the Vatican embassy in Panama City, the country’s capital, where he remained for 11 days. There, he was subjected to relentless psychological warfare to compel his surrender. The US military set up a horrible, deafening wall of sound outside the embassy. A fleet of Humvees with loudspeakers constantly played hard rock and occasionally heavy metal music. For example, “Panama” by the heavy metal band Van Halen was played.
The Holy See rightly complained to President Bush, and the musical warfare ended after three days. By January 3, 1990, the general had agreed to surrender.
But what are the deeper reasons for the US military invasion of Venezuela and the pursuit of overthrowing its insubordinate existing regime?
Venezuela, therefore, has the largest proven oil reserves in the world, amounting to approximately 303.8 billion barrels as of 2021. For comparison, other leading oil-producing countries have smaller reserves: Saudi Arabia has approximately 267 billion barrels, and Kuwait has 101.5 billion barrels.
Additionally, the country’s proven natural gas reserves exceeded 5.6 trillion cubic meters in 2021. Notably, within the Western Hemisphere, only the United States held larger reserves.
Venezuela’s total iron ore reserves are also estimated at 4.5 billion tons. It should be emphasized that, in terms of iron reserves, the country ranks second in the region after Brazil. Finally, Venezuela holds some of the largest bauxite reserves in the world, a mineral used to produce aluminum. The country’s total bauxite reserves amount to 950 million tons.
It is, therefore, clear to any objective observer that the US covets Venezuela’s wealth-producing resources. Resources inaccessible to them under the existing regime, which is a political and military partner and ally of Moscow, Beijing, and Tehran, and also the main supplier of oil to China, thereby limiting US access.
The solution, therefore, for the US, to secure primacy in the relentless international competition, is the overthrow of the existing Venezuelan regime and the emergence of a president and government that are absolutely friendly and amenable. Whether such an action is legal or democratic does not concern them at all.
In closing, I would like to emphasize that the leaders of any country should only be overthrown by their people—that is, by popular uprisings and revolutions, as has happened in various countries in the past. They are not to be overthrown by the military intervention of another country, a foreign power. Therefore, the US military invasion of Venezuela and the kidnapping of its president, Nicolas Maduro, are absolutely condemnable for any democratic and free-thinking citizen of the world.
AUTHOR : Isidoros Karderinis, journalist, foreign press correspondent accredited by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, regular member of the Greek Foreign Press Correspondents’ Association, novelist, poet and lyricist. Facebook: Karderinis Isidoros.
Loading …
Leave a Reply