Trump's Venezuela Regime Change: The Iraq Debacle All Over Again

Who exactly is supposed to govern Venezuela after Maduro? The opposition is fragmented, has limited institutional capacity, and lacks control over much of the country's territory. Various factions have competing visions and leadership claims. Meanwhile, millions of Venezuelans – particularly among the poorer classes who benefited from Chávez-era social programs – retain some loyalty to the Bolivarian project, even if they're disillusioned with Maduro personally. This isn't a country unified in anticipation of American liberation.

From a realist perspective, this intervention represents a monumental strategic blunder that will undermine American interests throughout Latin America. The United States has just validated every anti-imperialist narrative that has animated Latin American politics for over a century. Washington has handed a propaganda victory to every leftist movement in the hemisphere.

Consider the regional response. The governments of Mexico, Brazil, Argentina and Colombia – whatever their private reservations about Maduro – will face enormous domestic pressure to condemn American military action. The images of US troops in Caracas will be plastered across media throughout the region, accompanied by reminders of past American interventions from Guatemala to Chile to Panama. The notion that Latin American governments will provide meaningful support for this operation is wishful thinking.

Cuba, Nicaragua and whatever remains of the Maduro regime's support network will use this intervention to justify their own authoritarian measures and resistance to American influence. This operation breathes new life into anti-American coalitions that had been weakening as Venezuela's socialist experiment collapsed under its own weight. We've taken a regime that was failing organically and turned it into a martyr for the cause of anti-imperialism.

The intervention also plays directly into the hands of America's great power competitors. Both China and Russia have invested heavily in Venezuela – financially, politically, and strategically. Beijing holds billions in Venezuelan debt and has energy interests in the country. Moscow has used Venezuela as a foothold for challenging American dominance in the Western Hemisphere.

Rather than allowing Venezuela's economic implosion to demonstrate the bankruptcy of their client state model, we've now provided Beijing and Moscow with a justification to deepen their involvement. They can frame this as American aggression requiring a response. Expect increased material support for whatever resistance emerges, turning Venezuela into a proxy battleground. We've potentially created our own version of the Soviet quagmire in Afghanistan – except this time we're the Soviets, and it's happening in our own hemisphere.

Let's talk about what this intervention will actually cost. The initial military operation might succeed relatively quickly – Maduro's conventional forces are no match for American military power. But then what?

Occupying Venezuela, securing its infrastructure, preventing the country from descending into militia warfare, rebuilding institutions and fostering anything resembling democratic governance will require years of commitment and hundreds of billions of dollars. American troops will need to patrol Venezuelan cities, secure oil facilities, protect supply lines and deal with insurgent attacks.

The American people, already exhausted from two decades of Middle East wars, have no appetite for another open-ended military commitment. Congress will balk at the costs. And when public support inevitably wanes and Washington looks for an exit, we'll leave behind a destabilized country, strengthened anti-American movements throughout the region, and another stain on American credibility.