Global & US Headlines
U.S. ‘Operation Absolute Resolve’ Snatches Maduro, Flies Him to Brooklyn Jail
In the predawn hours of 3 Jan 2026, more than 150 U.S. aircraft supported special-forces troops who seized Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in Caracas and delivered him the same day to the Metropolitan Detention Center in New York—the first time a sitting head of state has been brought to U.S. soil for criminal trial.
Focusing Facts
- Raid began ~2:01 a.m. Caracas time on 3 Jan 2026 and involved 150+ aircraft, including F-22s, F-35s and B-1Bs, to punch a corridor to Ft. Tiuna compound.
- Maduro and Cilia Flores expected to be arraigned 5 Jan 2026 before Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein in SDNY on narco-terrorism, cocaine-importation and weapons charges originally unsealed in a superseding indictment.
- Hours after the capture, President Donald Trump said the U.S. would “run” Venezuela and sell its oil until a “safe, proper, judicious transition,” while Venezuela’s Supreme Court named VP Delcy Rodríguez acting president.
Context
Washington has not yanked a foreign leader onto U.S. turf since the 20 Dec 1989 invasion of Panama that captured Manuel Noriega—an operation that, like this one, was justified under drug-trafficking indictments and involved airborne strikes on air defenses. Yet today’s action vaults several steps further: Noriega had already declared war on the United States and was seized after open invasion, whereas Maduro was the internationally recognized head of state only minutes before Delta Force breached his bedroom. The raid taps into two long arcs: the 200-year Monroe Doctrine pattern of U.S. intervention in Latin America and the post-1986 ‘Kingpin’ strategy of treating drug crime as national-security threat allowing extraterritorial grabs (e.g., Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán 2017). By projecting police power directly, Washington signals that sovereignty can be overridden by U.S. courts—a precedent rivals may cite when pursuing their own fugitives abroad. On a century scale, the moment may mark either the high-water line of American hegemonic reach or the spark for new norms of great-power vigilantism; history will judge whether it resembles the decisive 1903 Panama Canal coup that redrew hemispheric relations or the 1954 Guatemala intervention that sowed decades of backlash. For Venezuela, blessed with the world’s largest proven oil reserves, the long-term question is whether outside seizure of leadership accelerates political stabilization or entrenches a cycle of dependency and resistance as the energy transition slowly erodes the strategic value that made the country a target in the first place.
Perspectives
Right-leaning and pro-Trump media
e.g., The Statesman, News Ghana — They depict the raid as a triumph of U.S. power that finally brings an allegedly corrupt "dictator" to justice and even justify Washington temporarily "running" Venezuela. Coverage cheers Trump’s muscular foreign policy, minimizes discussion of civilian casualties or questions of international law, and highlights oil opportunities for American companies.
Centrist Western outlets stressing legal and geopolitical uncertainty
e.g., Euronews, USA Today, CBS News — Reports emphasize the unprecedented nature of seizing a sitting head-of-state, describe the dramatic logistics, and quote experts worrying about precedents for sovereignty and regional stability. Although raising concerns, the framing remains U.S.-centric and implicitly accepts the premise that American courts can try foreign leaders, giving less weight to Venezuelan or regional voices.
Global South and non-Western outlets critical of U.S. intervention
e.g., Saba News Agency, The Financial Express — They cast the strike as an aggressive breach of Venezuelan sovereignty that prompted emergency U.N. appeals and may have inflicted civilian casualties. This viewpoint leans on Venezuelan government claims and broader anti-U.S. sentiment, giving scant attention to the narco-terrorism indictment or Maduro’s alleged crimes.