US operation to capture Maduro sets a dangerous precedent

M A Hossain, 

The U.S. operation that seized Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, in the early hours of January 3, 2026, will be defended in Washington as bold law enforcement. Abroad, and in much of the Global South, it looks like something else entirely: a dangerous revival of gunboat justice dressed up as counter-narcotics policy.

Operation Absolute Resolve was not subtle. Delta Force units, supported by more than 150 aircraft, struck Venezuelan air defenses and sites near Caracas before helicopters descended on the presidential residence at 2:01 a.m. Maduro and Flores were arrested while attempting to flee. There was no full-scale invasion, no occupation. This was a unilateral military raid inside a sovereign country, aimed at abducting a sitting head of state.

The U.S. prosecutors in the Southern District of New York accuse Maduro of leading the so-called Cártel de Los Soles, conspiring to import cocaine into the United States, and possessing machine guns and destructive devices. Flores is charged with cocaine importation conspiracy, alleged to have brokered bribes and facilitated trafficking through state channels. Yet even strong accusations do not nullify international law.

If Washington claims the right to launch air strikes near a foreign capital and seize its president because U.S. courts have issued indictments, what principle is left to restrain others? Russia, China, Iran, and Cuba were quick to call the operation a violation of sovereignty. Brazil’s president warned of regional destabilization. These reactions were predictable, but they were not hollow. The UN Charter is unambiguous about the use of force: abducting a sitting president via military action breaches that framework.

Criticism also came from within the United States. Lawmakers such as Bernie Sanders and Rashida Tlaib condemned the raid as illegal military adventurism and a constitutional affront. Their point deserves attention. The U.S. has long argued, rightly, against coups, kidnappings, and regime change by force. That moral authority erodes when the rules are bent for convenience.

The question is not whether Maduro is guilty; it is who gets to decide, and how. By choosing helicopters over courts and force over a multilateral process, Washington may have secured a dramatic arrest. It has also weakened the very norms it claims to defend, and handed its rivals a powerful argument: that American power, once again, answers mainly to itself.

M.A. Hossain, Dhaka, Bangladesh 

This article published at :

1. South China Morning Post, HK : 07 Jan,26