Nearly 36 years back, the U.S. launched an invasion of Panama to remove General Manuel Noriega from power. It took just two weeks for 27,000 American troops to overcome resistance from Panamanian forces.
After the invasion, Noriega was extradited to the U.S., where he faced trial for drug trafficking and money laundering. He spent 18 years in a Miami prison before being sent to France in 2010 to tackle more money laundering charges.
Like former President George H.W. Bush, who labeled Noriega a “drug lord,” Trump has accused Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro of being involved in drug trafficking and connected to criminal operations. Trump has been quite open about wanting to see Maduro ousted.
Recently, he ramped up pressure on Maduro by authorizing strikes on seven Venezuelan ships in international waters. Tragically, the crew was charged with drug smuggling, and in the aftermath, everyone aboard was killed, save for two Colombians who were sent back home.
This marks the largest U.S. troop deployment to the Caribbean since 1989, with 10,000 troops, several surface ships, drones, reconnaissance planes, a Marine Corps amphibious ready group, and 2,200 Marines bringing tactical aviation. On October 15, Trump revealed he had given CIA the green light for covert operations in Venezuela. Airstrikes are also on the table, posing a significant threat via U.S. fighter jets and bombers near Venezuelan coasts.
Maduro, perhaps unwilling to meet Noriega’s fate, announced plans in August to mobilize 4.5 million militias to defend against “gringo” incursions. Some experts dismissed this as mere bluster, pointing out that Venezuela’s military is not particularly well-equipped or trained.
However, Maduro isn’t likely to give up the presidency without a fight, and attacking Venezuela wouldn’t mirror the swift success the U.S. had in Panama. For one, Venezuela is about 12 times larger than Panama, both in area and population. The size of Maduro’s militia alone surpasses Panama’s entire population.
It’s uncertain whether Venezuelan rebels would collaborate with the U.S. to overthrow Maduro. There’s a chance they might rally together to defend their homeland, reminiscent of how Russians united against German invasion in 1941, despite prior suffering under Stalin.
Similar to the late 20th-century Soviet Union, U.S. experiences in Afghanistan illustrate how a dedicated military can withstand and potentially thrive against a technologically superior foe. Current resistance by Ukraine against Russian forces highlights that strategies effective decades ago may not apply today.
Moreover, the prospect of support from other nations for Venezuela can’t be ignored. Colombian President Gustavo Petro indicated that a U.S. attack could be seen as an attack on Latin America as a whole. As a leftist with only seven months remaining in his term, Petro has clashed with Trump and might send U.S.-trained troops to assist Maduro.
Similarly, Brazilian President Lula da Silva, who has his own issues with Trump regarding trade and political rivalries, might also back Maduro. While he has expressed hopes for a “civilized” relationship with the U.S., that sentiment could evaporate quickly if aggression occurs in the region. Brazil’s military is notably more capable than Venezuela’s, so their involvement could complicate any expectations of a swift U.S. win.
Lastly, China has been a supporter of Maduro thus far, though mostly through statements rather than military support. If a U.S. invasion takes place, that could change, possibly providing Maduro with military resources to enhance Venezuela’s ability to resist.
The current U.S. troop presence in the Caribbean could diminish forces in other regions. If the U.S. finds itself in a prolonged conflict, there’s a possibility that China’s President Xi Jinping might see an opportunity to take actions regarding Taiwan.
It’s true that Maduro is a brutal dictator, and Trump is correct about his role in drug trafficking. Yet, history suggests that regime change hasn’t fared well for the U.S. in the 21st century. It would be wise for the White House to carefully weigh the profound risks that extend beyond current tactics aimed at unseating a tenacious dictator.
