1) Long-Term U.S.–Venezuela Tensions and Maduro’s U.S. Indictments

The U.S. and Venezuela have been adversaries for years, especially under Hugo Chávez and later Nicolás Maduro, whose government was accused by Washington of authoritarianism, electoral fraud, repression and human rights abuses.

Maduro was indicted in the U.S. on multiple criminal charges — including “narco-terrorism,” drug trafficking and weapons offenses — as far back as 2020. U.S. authorities even offered a substantial reward for information leading to his arrest.

2) Escalation from Sanctions to Military Pressure

Before the strike, U.S. pressure escalated through multiple non-military measures:

Heavy sanctions targeting Venezuela’s oil industry and financial networks.

Naval and air operations aimed at interdiction of drug-linked boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific.

Designation of Venezuelan gangs (e.g., Tren de Aragua) as terrorist organizations.

These were justified by U.S. officials as part of an intensified “war on drugs” strategy and attributed to Maduro’s alleged support for criminal networks.

3) U.S. Narrative and Justification for Force

The Trump administration publicly framed the 3 January 2026 operation as necessary because:

Maduro’s government was “shielding” drug cartels and contributing to cocaine flows into the United States.

Previous sanctions and non-military pressure had failed to remove Maduro.

Maduro lacked democratic legitimacy after contested elections.

President Trump stated that U.S. forces carried out a “large-scale strike” and that Maduro and his wife were captured and flown out to face trial in New York.

4) The Military Operation Itself

The attack, called Operation Absolute Resolve, involved a coordinated military strike against Venezuelan military sites (e.g., Fuerte Tiuna in Caracas) in the early hours of 3 January 2026.

Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, were reportedly captured by U.S. forces and transported out of the country.

This is one of the most significant U.S. direct interventions in Latin America in decades, likened to the 1989 invasion of Panama.

5) Key Drivers Behind the U.S. Decision

Experts and reporting suggest multiple overlapping motives:

a) Criminal and Drug Trafficking Allegations

The U.S. government has accused Maduro’s regime of being deeply involved in the drug trade, making this a law-enforcement and national security rationale.

b) Undermining Maduro’s Legitimacy

Washington viewed Maduro as an illegitimate leader after disputed elections and saw traditional diplomatic pressure as ineffective.

c) Geopolitical and Resource Interests

Venezuela holds the world’s largest proven oil reserves, and control over these resources contributes to strategic interests.

Chavez and Maduro’s close ties with China, Russia, Cuba and Iran compounded U.S. concerns about influence in the Western Hemisphere.

6) International and Legal Fallout

The operation has sparked intense controversy:

United Nations and human rights groups warned the action violates international law and sovereignty norms.

Regional governments reacted sharply, with some condemning the intervention and others expressing cautious support or concern about stability.

Legal experts argue that using military force under the guise of targeting criminal leadership is unprecedented and dangerous for global norms.

Summary: What Really Led to the Strike

It wasn’t a sudden isolated event. The U.S. strike and capture of Maduro were the culmination of:

Longstanding adversarial relations, dating back to earlier administrations.

Criminal indictments and an escalating “narco-terrorism” narrative.

Intensified sanctions and military pressure after democratic crisis and contested elections.

Frustration in Washington that non-military measures failed to remove Maduro.

A strategic calculation by the Trump administration that military force was justified — framed as both an anti-drug campaign and intervention to force political change.