Tag: Venezuela

  • Machado deserves the Nobel

    Machado deserves the Nobel

    I was fourteen when I clambered onto a boulder along Caracas’s Francisco Fajardo highway – what people called Piedra de la Libertad, the Liberty Rock – and spoke out about a government that had just ignored a referendum. “Tyranny” was more than a buzzword. To my astonishment, a woman I didn’t yet know – María Corina – helped me climb it. With her megaphone, I spoke of unifying, as a sea of flags from rival parties fluttered before me.

    Many dismissed her then. A woman who once called Chávez a “thief” to his face – too brash, too ideological, too direct for the choreography of Venezuelan politics. The old hands said she could never reach the people; she lacked the soothing tones, the feigned humility, the convenient ambiguity that defined our politicians. As a young member in the National Assembly, she was sidelined. She was too elegant, too upper-class – a sifrina, as Caracas gossips liked to say, the Venezuelan equivalent of a Valley girl. How could a man from the hills of Petare ever vote for her? She doesn’t have “the balls,” they said.

    They were wrong.

    Today, history has delivered yet another act of vindication. The Nobel Committee has awarded María Corina Machado the Nobel Peace Prize, citing her “tireless work promoting democratic rights for the people of Venezuela and her struggle to achieve a just and peaceful transition from dictatorship to democracy.” Amid threats, bans, and intimidation, she stayed – refusing exile, unlike so many of the men once praised for having “the balls.” Though barred from appearing on the ballot, she led her movement to victory through Edmundo González, winning more than seventy percent of the vote. Now in hiding, she continues to labor, with unbroken discipline, toward a peaceful transfer of power.

    Some skeptics call her win puzzling, particularly in a moment when the world is watching Trump mediate a ceasefire in the Middle East. They argue: surely, stabilizing a brutal conflict warrants a Nobel more than the struggle of a single nation. These are understandable complaints – and one sure hopes that when peace materializes, Trump will get his Nobel. Yet to dismiss Machado’s recognition is wrong-headed. Plus, attempts to make Machado appear as a figure that opposes Trump is plainly ridiculous – she even dedicated her prize “to President Trump for his decisive support of our cause.” She knows Trump deserves his Nobel too.

    Attack the prize itself if you wish. After all, Senator Mike Lee isn’t wrong when he remarks that “apparently the Nobel Peace Prize isn’t about delivering peace anymore.” Alfred Nobel’s 1895 will defined the award as recognition for those who have accomplished “the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies, and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.”

    By that reading, few modern laureates qualify. Yet the committee long ago widened its understanding of peace to include those who wage domestic campaigns rather than diplomatic ones. Poland’s Lech Wałęsa, America’s Martin Luther King Jr., Myanmar’s Aung San Suu Kyi – their prizes honored movements, not treaties; conviction, not realpolitik.

    Criticizing the prize itself has its logic – a logic I share. What makes little sense is dismissing María Corina Machado’s fight. Hers, too, is a movement – civil, disciplined and rooted in the idea that peace is not merely the end of conflict, but the beginning of freedom.

    What Machado has done is durable: she has carved out a moral pole in a country where everything else has crumbled. She is the first Venezuelan opposition leader to cement a position – not in charisma, but in principle. Though barred from contesting in 2024, it was her movement that outpaced Chavismo in hearts and minds. She is the first to deliver a genuine, stark ideological, moral and political alternative that has beaten Chavismo in recognition – even if the seizure of power remains pending.

    As she hides in an undisclosed location within Venezuela, separated from her family, Machado’s resolve stands in sharp contrast to the opposition figures who sought safety abroad. Juan Guaidó and others, once luminous names, now flicker dimly from foreign capitals. Machado stayed.

    Her struggle has always been peaceful. She called for marches and assemblies, even when many Venezuelans, understandably, chafed at the limits of nonviolence. And she did so without fear – unlike former presidential candidate Henrique Capriles, who bent under the regime’s threats and now serves as little more than a decoration in the architecture of controlled opposition. If that is not Nobel-deserving, with the modern recipients in mind, then one wonders: what is?

    When she handed me the megaphone more than a decade ago, she offered belief. I knew then that the movement she would lead would become a vessel for her country’s conscience. She aimed for a moral revolution at a time when climbing the political ladder rewarded conformity and orthodoxy. Many of those who now praise her – much like Trump – once ridiculed her.

    Her prize is not a consolation; it is a spotlight – and it is deserved. Her moral clarity, her endurance, her refusal to yield to bitterness are rare forms of courage in an age addicted to cynicism. Let us be careful not to undermine Machado’s merit. Her victory need not diminish Trump’s successes. They both deserve their Nobels.

  • Shutdown siestas

    Shutdown siestas

    Nothing beats a Jet2 holiday

    Washington is ten days into the government shutdown, and the Republicans and Democrats remain at loggerheads. Members are accosting each other in the corridors of power – in front of a gawking media, naturally – and challenging their adversaries to debate on TV shows. The impression our leaders are trying to give us is that they are working hard to reach a solution to the impasse. The same can’t be said for admin officials: Cockburn understands a large swathe have taken the opportunity to head off on vacation – and are doing their best to ensure they don’t post any pictures. (As ever, if you’ve spotted a secretary soaking in the sunshine, let Cockburn know at cockburn@thespectator.com.)

    As no one knows when an agreement will be reached, starting a week ago some officials booked some absurdly long-distance weekend trips, including one to the Persian Gulf, according to Cockburn’s sources.

    But mothballed federal workers, set to miss a paycheck, are frustrated with the shutdown. They’re not the only ones: a little birdie spotted Senator John Fetterman in the hallway on the Hill after a vote this week. The Pennsylvania Democrat put his hand under the hand-sanitizer machine. Nothing came out… so he walked into the elevator, muttering, “government never works.” Too right.

    On our radar

    WHAT’S UP, DOC? President Trump is spending the morning at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, where he will undergo an annual physical.

    AGENT MELANIA While her husband was occupied, First Lady Melania Trump gave a rare press conference, detailing how she’d been in back-channel contact with President Vladimir Putin of Russia in order to secure the return of Ukrainian children who’d been abducted during his invasion.

    TISH UPON A STAR The Department of Justice indicted New York Attorney General Leticia James on bank fraud and false-statement charges Thursday. The evidence was presented by Lindsey Halligan, the former Miss Colorado runner-up and newly appointed US Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia.

    Nobel intentions

    So, not this year then. María Corina Machado, the Venezuelan opposition leader, is the recipient of the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize. Given President Trump’s position on her rival President Nicolás Maduro – which most notably has taken the form of turning Venezuelan “drug boats” in the Caribbean into red mist – the choice by the Norwegian committee seems a sage one. Surely the President wouldn’t throw his toys out of the stroller after being passed over for a woman whose cause he supports?

    “We are on the threshold of victory and today, more than ever, we count on President Trump, the people of the United States, the peoples of Latin America, and the democratic nations of the world as our principal allies to achieve Freedom and democracy,” a savvy Machado posted on X this morning. “I dedicate this prize to the suffering people of Venezuela and to President Trump for his decisive support of our cause!”

    With his trademark subtlety, Trump has been campaigning for the Nobel Peace Prize over the first nine months of his presidency, securing letters of support from various world leaders and claiming to have ended seven wars. (If the Israel-Hamas ceasefire holds, that would make eight.)

    The world is watching his Truth Social timeline with bated breath as he undergoes a physical at Walter Reed this morning, to see how he reacts to being passed over. So far, he’s reposted Machado’s tribute to him. In the meantime, they will have to satisfy themselves with the musings of White House communications director Steven Cheung: “President Trump will continue making peace deals, ending wars, and saving lives. He has the heart of a humanitarian, and there will never be anyone like him who can move mountains with the sheer force of his will. The Nobel Committee proved they place politics over peace.”

    If Trump is seeking inspiration for how to respond with grace after being overlooked for an honor, he should probably avoid the example set by David Beckham. The soccer star was hoping to be knighted by the Queen following the 2012 London Olympics. Leaked emails revealed that he was not best pleased with the Honors Committee: “Who decides on the honors? It’s a disgrace to be honest and if I was American I would of [sic] got something like this 10 years ago…” That’s the only part Cockburn can safely quote…

    Who will play Turning Point USA’s alternative halftime show?

    Turning Point USA has announced its plans to host an “All-American Halftime Show” during the Super Bowl. It’s offering this as an alternative to the actual halftime show, which will feature Puerto Rican entertainer Bad Bunny, who mostly performs in Spanish. TPUSA doesn’t like Bad Bunny’s stance on ICE, which included him posting a video of ICE raids in his home territory of Puerto Rico, where he called ICE “sons of bitches.”

    But who, exactly, is TPUSA going to be able to recruit to even vaguely approach the popularity of Bad Bunny, the second-most streamed artist in the country on Spotify so far this year? The appropriately named Creed, who have never done the Super Bowl but did once perform an iconic 9/11 tribute show in Dallas during a Thanksgiving game, might be available and willing. There are some obvious MAGA country choices, such as the ossified Lee Greenwood, Ted Nugent, Kid Rock, Jason Aldean, maybe Toby Keith. TPUSA probably won’t be able to land Luke Bryan and definitely doesn’t want Zack Bryan – no relation – whom DHS Secretary and “Deportation Barbie” Kristi Noem said this week had written a “completely disrespectful” song with lyrics that claim ICE “is going to come bust down your door.”

    All this halftime politics nonsense makes Cockburn miss the apolitical days of wardrobe malfunctions, Prince shredding and Britney Spears and Aerosmith duetting on “Walk This Way.” His prediction: TPUSA’s All-American Halftime Show will have a wan YouTube audience while Santa Clara rocks to Bad Bunny bringing out Daddy Yankee for a duet on “Gasolina.” It will be completely disrespectful – and thoroughly entertaining.

  • What Trump really wants from Venezuela

    What Trump really wants from Venezuela

    When the headlines scream “narco-wars” and pundits wag their fingers about “fentanyl,” it is tempting to reduce Donald Trump’s Venezuela policy to one issue: drugs. A convenient shorthand – but also a red herring. Read closely and a very different logic emerges. 

    Drugs matter, and the effort is to some degree about exactly that. Yet so does immigration. Venezuela’s hydrocarbons also matter – and they matter even more in a world where OPEC has been deliberately constraining supply to keep oil prices high.  

    Deploying narcotics as a public justification is smart politics. It communicates a moral urgency that resonates at home (the drug crisis is real) and offers a legal-rhetorical peg overseas (designating cartels as terror proxies, authorizing kinetic steps under counter-terror authorities). But policy is not simply argument; it is incentive architecture. 

    Trump’s operation in Caracas is being built around a set of incentives – for the United States, for Caracas’s elites, for regional partners – that are designed to minimize the chance of an expensive occupation while still extracting tangible leverage – maybe for regime change but also maybe for a great deal. Think of it as the art of coercion without conquest: pressure applied across multiple vectors until the cost of continued behavior exceeds the benefit. It’s actually pretty straightforward. 

    First: Trump dislikes regime-change wars in the classic sense. The “America First” portfolio is transactional by design: fewer open-ended nation-building campaigns, more calibrated use of force or diplomatic pressure where the legal and political cover exists. Analysts who assume he secretly dreams of invasions are projecting a familiar neocon fantasy onto an administration that, in practice, is stingy about long ground wars. Evidence? You don’t need it, just look at recent history. 

    Second: Immigration is leverage. Policy signals link security operations to deportation and migration enforcement. In recent moves, naval deployments and strikes on alleged trafficking vessels have been accompanied by rhetoric and, at points, explicit linkage to deportation policies. Military pressure, then, functions as bargaining power in a broader domestic political market.

    Third: Venezuela is about oil. The South American country has long been known as a hydrocarbon state, and for good reason. In World War Two, Venezuelan crude was indispensable to the Allied effort, fueling ships, planes and entire campaigns across the Atlantic. Today, by contrast, the United States trades virtually nothing with Caracas – a startling reversal given that Venezuela still holds the largest proven reserves in the world. If brought back into the US market, and modernized, its output could rival Gulf producers and alter the balance of supply. 

    Fixating on crude alone, however, misses the resources that also matter in 21st-century geopolitics – the critical minerals that feed electric vehicles, batteries and telecom. Beijing’s interest in Venezuela, for one, is not sentimental. It is a modern scramble for inputs. Washington’s policy calculus therefore has an industrial logic as well as a geopolitical one: deny adversaries secure access, protect supply chains, and leave a neighboring state structurally unable to become a reliable client of a rival power.

    Unlike Ukraine, Venezuela’s resource wealth doesn’t need to be inflated – it is obvious, vast and sitting in plain sight. Unlike Iran, despite Maduro’s theatrical boasts of millions of “militiamen,” the country has no real military capability. Unlike Taiwan, we don’t need to invoke the complexity of semiconductors; Venezuela’s importance is more tangible, rooted in immigration, drugs, oil, gas and minerals. And unlike the myth of a population united in anti-Americanism, Venezuelans’ resentment of Washington is overstated – their hatred of Maduro certainly runs far deeper. 

    Seen from this angle, the narco-terror narrative is a tool – a great one. Declaring networks as terror or terrorist-adjacent reconfigures the legal playbook. It widens authorities, attracts military assets and legitimizes potential strikes that would be harder to justify under other rubrics. It also performs a diplomatic service: it makes pressure acceptable to partners who would recoil at a naked campaign aimed at regime decapitation. The subtext is surgical: apply pain without promising occupation. 

    A full-scale invasion or a prolonged occupation would be catastrophic for the United States politically and logistically; it would also play straight into the hands of Caracas’s propaganda and regional rivals. So if you cannot replace Maduro through direct warfare, how do you change his cost-benefit calculus? You make continued rule more expensive, more dangerous, and less useful: target revenue streams, hinder patronage, sap his ability to reward subordinates and increase the political price of belligerence. See the logic?

    Critics who treat Trump’s approach as incoherent are often reading intentions without seeing incentives. They assume that because the rhetoric is muscular, the endgame must be militarized. But policy is a transaction between ends and feasible means. Trump’s approach always aims to maximize leverage while minimizing open-ended commitments. That is not a cautious liberal policy of benign persuasion; it is a hard-nosed transactionalism that prefers calibrated coercion to costly conquest. By contrast, Biden relied too much on goodwill and “good gait” diplomacy – noble on paper, disastrous in practice.

    Trump’s policy welds legal cover, domestic political salience, asymmetric pressure, and an appreciation for resources into one instrument. The risks are real: escalation through miscalculation, the entanglement of law enforcement and low-intensity military force, and the moral hazard of normalizing extraterritorial strikes. But proceeding with prudence – not cowardice – has great potential. As Trump fans love to say, “trust the plan.” 

  • Inside Trump’s war on the cartels

    Inside Trump’s war on the cartels

    To deal with big problems, the second presidency of Donald Trump adopts a three-step approach. First, the declaration of authority: in this case, the designation announced in February of multiple Mexican and South American cartels as international terror organizations, opening up new avenues for legal, intelligence and potential military responses.

    Next, eye-popping kinetic action: this came with SOUTHCOM’s deployment in August of eight warships to the Caribbean and Pacific Oceans, including three Aegis guided-missile destroyers parked off the coast of Venezuela along with a landing dock, amphibious assault ships and a fast-attack nuclear submarine. These vessels can carry 4,500 Navy and Marines along with helicopters, advanced surveillance equipment and cruise missiles that can strike anywhere at will.

    Earlier this month, we saw a missile kill 11 “narco-terrorists” on a boat coming out of Venezuela. “Instead of interdicting it, on the President’s orders, we blew it up,” confirmed Secretary of State Marco Rubio. “And it’ll happen again.”

    The third step involves a very public forging of Trumpian symbolism: look to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s announcement last month of the restoration of the Mexican Border Defense Medal, an award given originally to the armed forces that supported the expedition of General “Black Jack” Pershing (a personal favorite of Trump’s) in Mexico more than a century ago. The bronze Roman sword and crossed sabers on a medal emblazoned “For Service on the Mexican Border” could hardly send a louder message. Watch out, Mexico: MAGA has found the one war it wants.

    If this second administration has a motto, it’s “again this time, but for real.” Tweets fired off from the hip, now in the form of Truth Social posts, could once be dismissed even by the President’s supporters as something to be taken seriously, but not literally. Now, the Donald’s outbursts are gospel. In his first term, Trump and the likes of then-secretary of state Mike Pompeo publicly entertained the idea of escalating the mission against Mexico’s cartels to a military priority, but never formally did so. This time, the primary Mexico brief landed not at State, Homeland Security or Justice – but with gung-ho Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

    On his first call in January with Mexican officials, the newly confirmed Hegseth delivered an unequivocal message: that unilateral US military action was on the table if Mexico didn’t step up action against the cartels – a statement that left the Mexican brass “shocked and angered” according to the Wall Street Journal, but directly preceded the unprecedented handover of 29 top cartel officials for extradition.

    If that was supposed to satisfy Hegseth, it hasn’t – in the months since, he has publicly stated that “we’re taking nothing off the table – nothing,” when it comes to potential strikes and that “we’re watching [the cartels], and we know a little bit more than they think we know about them.”

    A network of drones and spyplanes provide an eye-in-the-skyview of cartel assets and activity

    What the US knows is largely thanks to a network of drones and spy planes which provide an eye-in-the-sky view of cartel assets and activity. They are technologically capable of transforming from watchers to weapons as they have to great effect in Africa and the Middle East. Razing targets from the sky is not something the Mexican military is built to defend against: their assignment is the control of the Mexican people. One analyst told me: “There is no part of Mexico we cannot reach.” But this White House and the key players in Trump’s cabinet also recognize that declaring war on the cartels – by wiping out fentanyl labs, demolishing training camps in Jalisco, or killing drug kingpins – is pointless if, Hydra-like, the monster’s heads simply grow back.

    That’s why for this White House, success is defined as forcing the Mexican government to do what it doesn’t want to. As Hegseth indicated on that first call, Mexico must handle the cartel problem itself, lest the Americans handle it instead.

    One reason war on the cartels has become a MAGA priority is due to the forward-looking politics of the top men surrounding the President. Vice President J.D. Vance, Rubio and even Hegseth himself could conceivably run in 2028, and Trump’s close advisors, such as Stephen Miller, have warned that a temporarily quiet border isn’t enough. Mexico is a problem to be solved now, not when the cartel’s spigot of drugs and trafficking presumably turns back on in three years’ time.

    It’s telling that Rubio is aligned with this stepped-up mission, potentially breaking with the prevailing views among long-serving diplomatic experts such as Spanish-born former ambassador to Mexico Christopher Landau, currently Deputy Secretary of State, who prefer the public-facing perception of cooperation and fear potential blowback over military action. While officials who prioritize the status quo are loath to openly criticize Mexican leadership, within the administration there is a sizable faction, possibly including the President himself, who no longer believe Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum when she says she’s cooperating. “The Mexicans are just trying to buy time until the White House changes hands again,” one analyst told me.

    For Mexican nationalists and anti-war critics on right and left, Trump’s burgeoning cartel war is framed as an act of imperial authoritarianism: simply the next step for a President who talked of buying Greenland and making Canada the 51st state. The less radical criticism raised in the pages of the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal has focused more on the lack of effectiveness: that Hydra problem again. But the truth is that Trump and his team of warriors have no designs to conquer Mexico, or even to eliminate the cartels completely – instead, they view the aim of kinetic military action as a threat designed to force Mexico to end the dominance of the cartels itself.

    Left to its own devices, Mexico would have little appetite for this. The protection of these powerful entities has become the number one priority of the state. The cartels raked in billions from trafficking millions of people and poisoning tens of thousands during the Joe Biden years, and they paid a pretty penny to the Mexican government to do so. This effectively turned our neighbor into a quasi-failed narco state.

    In Mexico, politicians work for criminals – or else they are the criminals. And the politicians have hardly been quiet about it – see former president (and still the most influential politician in Mexico) Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who declared any assault on the cartels as tantamount to war on all Mexicans. He called it “demonization,” saying that the cartels were “respectful people” who “respect the citizenry.”

    The former ruler now presides from the security of his ranch, La Chingada (translated, it means “the fucking thing” or “the one who’s fucked”), where he exercises control of the ruling party via his son and a vast network of cronies. On the rare occasions where Sheinbaum has opposed an AMLO decision, such as nominations for various offices, the former president’s loyalists in the Mexican Congress have reminded her who’s actually boss. They remain loyal to the leader who enriched them so well with decades of bribes and kickbacks. But there is a crack in the facade: AMLO is well aware he enjoys his quasi-retirement (he is ostensibly writing a history of Mexico) only so long as his successor succeeds in keeping the US out.

    As AMLO’s chosen heir, Sheinbaum is a true believer following a more pragmatic leftist nationalist – imagine a Bernie superfan inheriting the mantle from the man himself. Berkeley-educated Sheinbaum has managed her relationship with Trump relatively well, praising him in English and saving her criticisms for Mexican audiences. Yet part of the reason AMLO chose her in the first place is her weakness – she has no organic base within the Morena party apart from him. And her naive ideological commitment to AMLO’s utopian program has earned her disdain and even naked contempt from the former president’s cronies, who were spotted earlier this year declining to shake her hand after a major public speech. 

    There’s a distinct lack of on-the-ground human intelligence about the cartels’ activity, but a series of recent court deals could play an important role. Information from Ismael “El Mayo” Zambada, the co-founder of the Sinaloa Cartel who faces a life sentence after pleading guilty in New York, and from Ovidio Guzmán López, son of El Chapo, who pleaded guilty in Chicago, could change that. Both have the ability to inform on key figures within the cartels and the Mexican government itself.

    Mexico hawks believe recent improvement on the border is not due to Sheinbaum, but to a change of mindset by the cartels and their government cronies who have perhaps calculated that a few lean years under Trump are tolerable, especially if Gavin Newsom takes over next. But a temporarily quiet border isn’t enough for this version of Trump, and Mexico is one area where the MAGA base and its brain trust seem open to the idea of more aggressive action.

    “There’s a 1,950-mile border that changes the calculus for MAGA, with a much more present awareness of the danger because of that proximity,” says Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts. He emphasizes that the institutional right would be “categorically supportive” and dismisses the idea of backfire from the President’s base. “There are a lot of us outside the White House who are working with the folks on the inside on raising up Monroe Doctrine 2.0, including key players in the administration. If you do what needs to be done to wreck the cartels, who would complain on the right?”

    Roberts also believes that a motivating factor for some is Mexico’s Chinese connection – comparing it to Germany’s Zimmermann Telegram of 1917 – both through investment and as a source for the basic elements of drug production. “[MAGA] people who want us to be less active in the Middle East and Europe are aware of this,” Roberts says. “The threat of increased presence of China in our hemisphere makes this a problem people are willing to confront, even if they are more uncertain about how to deal with challenges like Taiwan.”

    Ryan P. Williams, president of the California-based Claremont Institute, echoes this view. “This is about reflexive Jacksonian values. Our hemisphere has been the central focus of American foreign policy going back to a more responsible era when our statesmen were better educated by eighth grade than our leaders today,” he says, comparing the moment to John Quincy Adams’s defense of Andrew Jackson’s conquest of Florida. “If you have sovereign control over territory and you lose it, and violence comes from that which hurts our citizens, it’s our right to fix a situation if you can’t or won’t, including with force.”

    This is the one war MAGA believes is worth starting. “The bureaucratic institutional culture in Washington at places like the State Department thinks of problems as something to be managed and under no condition ever disrupted,” Williams says. “But a big course correction when it comes to Mexico has been long overdue, and the threat of a quasi-failed state run by cartels, with regular incursions over our southern border by drones and other forces, with drugs flowing into our streets fueled by Chinese materials – we should not put up with this any longer.”

    The drones are silent for now. Trump’s current approach is an encirclement strategy led by SOUTHCOM – going after the Venezuelans, the Cubans and the Nicaraguans, partnering with friendly governments such as Ecuador to eliminate Mexican criminals in their own state, and operating in a concentric fashion in an attempt to accomplish America’s aims without pulling the trigger. But the government stands ready, should that approach fail, in all likelihood followed by a solemn statement sincerely thanking our willing partners in the Mexican government for their cooperation and help – whether or not they gave it.

    This article was originally published in The Spectator’s September 15 2025 World edition.

  • By taking on the cartels, Trump is reasserting American authority

    By taking on the cartels, Trump is reasserting American authority

    The reporting process on Donald Trump’s war on the cartels for my latest cover story for The Spectator, published here today, mostly focused on the administration’s theory of the case: what they intend to do about the challenge of the drug running, human trafficking and terrorist activity by the narco syndicates to America’s south and why they believe a major escalation is necessary. In the intervening time between filing a piece and going to press, the theoretical became very real with the fiery destruction of a boat carrying drugs in international waters, allegedly steered by 11 now-dead members of Venezuela’s Tren de Aragua cartel. 

    Secretary of State Marco Rubio, asked about the shocking (to those who haven’t been paying attention) military strike, made clear that the rules of engagement have changed, and they are not going back to the old pattern of interdiction and trial. 

    “The President has been very clear that he’s going to use the full power of America and the full might of the United States to take on and eradicate these drug cartels, no matter where they’re operating from and no matter how long they’ve been able to act with impunity,” Rubio told journalists after traveling back from meetings in Mexico City. “Those days are over.” He added:

    I think as long as those vessels are in the region and as long as the President’s in the White House, he’s made very clear he’s not going to allow the United States to continue to be flooded with cocaine and fentanyl and other drugs coming from different places – this one is from Venezuela, which is a common route. But by the way, some of it ends up in Europe. A lot of it ends up in Puerto Rico and then on into the United States mainland. So no one should be surprised.  That’s why they’re there on a counter-drug mission, and they’re going to continue to operate. As far as specifics and future operations, I have to refer you to the Pentagon on that. This is a DoD operation…

    The President was very clear, and that is we destroyed a drug boat that left Venezuela operated by a designated narcoterrorist organization, which is what these are, and he’s been clear that the days of acting with impunity and having an engine shot down or a couple drugs grabbed off a boat, the – those days are over.  Now it is we are going to wage combat against drug cartels that are flooding American streets and killing Americans.

    The election-year depictions of Trump as a dovish isolationist who adopts a Lindberghian attitude toward America’s role in the world has never been accurate, and it has consistently been proven wrong not just in his first term but even more so in his second. The President’s attitude toward Canada, Greenland and the like have been dismissed as foolish talk, but the truth is that he is presiding over a reassertion of American authority over the Western Hemisphere that is long overdue. The war footing this administration is adopting now toward the cartels is still in its early days, but the die is cast – and there is no going back.

  • Trump’s strike on the Venezuelan ‘narco terrorists’

    President Trump has authorized what he called a “kinetic strike” from a US warship that destroyed a boat allegedly carrying drugs from Venezuela bound for the US, killing 11 so called “narco terrorists” aboard.

    The action by a US naval task force in international waters in the southern Caribbean is the first since the President threatened armed intervention against narcotics smuggling by Venezuela’s drugs cartels in January. Trump said that the attack was aimed at members of Venezuela’s Tren de Aragua drugs cartel which the US branded a terrorist organization in February, and which it claims is controlled by Venezuela’s socialist Maduro regime.

    The US Department of Justice has called Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro “the world’s No. 1 narco terrorist” and has put up a $50 million reward for information leading to his arrest on drugs trafficking charges.

    For his part, Maduro has vowed vengeance on any “empire setting foot on the sacred soil of Venezuela” – and called out his paramilitary Bolivar militia to guard the country’s borders. Thousands of Venezuelans queued at the weekend to register their membership in the force. Maduro has denied any links with the Tren de Aragua cartel, claiming that the gang was completely destroyed in a prison battle in 2023.

    Coincidentally or not, the Tren de Aragua gang’s rise coincided with the coming to power of Nicolas Maduro. Founded in 2014, the cartel spread across the Americas, ironically aided by the flight of millions of Venezuelans escaping the social and economic misery created by the Maduro regime.

    The cartel was founded by a gangster called Hector Guerrero Flores, known as Nino Guerrero. He and other leaders of the gang were jailed in Venezuela’s Tocoron prison, which became the cartel’s de facto headquarters under the gang’s control.

    Maduro’s security forces stormed the jail in 2023 and claimed that they had destroyed the cartel, but their power continued to grow, and US cities were flooded with fentanyl and other drugs trafficked by the organization.

    In March, President  Trump invoked the 18th-century Enemy Aliens Act, a wartime measure, and ordered the deportation of cartel members living in the U.S.  He compared the cartel to Al-Quaeda and other foreign terrorist groups. After some deportations were delayed by “lawfare” in US courts, Trump’s missile strike against the drugs boat represents the opening of a new front in the campaign against the flood of drugs originating in Venezuela.

    The US war against drug dealing Latin American dictators has a long history. In 1989/90 President George Bush senior ordered Operation Just Cause against Panama, a full scale invasion of the Central American state designed to extradite the country’s dictator, General Manuel Noriega, to face trial on drugs trafficking charges. Although Noriega had worked as a CIA agent of influence and had helped the US backed Contras fight the left-wing Sandinista regime in Nicaragua, this did not save him from deportation to the US and a 17-year stint in a Florida jail. He later served a jail sentence in France for money laundering and died in Panama of a brain tumor in 2017.

    Trump briefed reporters at a news conference in the White House Oval Office on Tuesday that he had ordered the strike to prevent the narcotics reaching the US. “…an awful lot of drugs on that boat,” he added. Later the President wrote on TruthSocial that the strike should “serve notice on anyone even thinking about bringing drugs into the United States of America. BEWARE.” A video posted by the President on the platform showed the boat exploding.

    Tension between the US and the poverty stricken socialist ruled state has ratcheted up in recent days after Trump sent a naval task force of seven warships and a nuclear powered submarine towards the Venezuelan coast. 

    Tuesday’s strike is the first time that the Trump administration has taken armed action against a Hispanic neighbor, and will revive memories of US interventions under previous administrations against states deemed to be harming American interests like Cuba, Panama and Grenada.

    The Maduro regime is now almost certain to take action against the US in revenge for the strike, though what form such action will take is not yet clear. The Venezuelan President, a former bus driver, was re-elected to office a year ago in a poll widely condemned by observers as rigged. Maduro is likely to try to revive his flagging popularity by appealing to Venezuelan patriotism and traditional Hispanic anti-Yankee nationalism.

    Since Maduro succeeded the charismatic Hugo Chavez in 2013, around eight million desperate people – an estimated one third of the entire Venezuelan population – have fled the country to escape rampant hyperinflation, widespread unemployment, and shortages of food and basic goods. Many of the refugees reached the US under the Biden administration, and Trump has been deporting those living in America illegally.

    Venezuela has enormous oil deposits which have been mismanaged by Maduro’s far-left government. Instead, the regime has derived much of its illicit income from the illegal trade in drugs which has been wreaking crime and chaos in America’s cities, and which Trump has pledged to halt. Now the President has acted on this pledge.

  • Trump’s big Bolivia opportunity

    Trump’s big Bolivia opportunity

    After nearly two decades of reign over Bolivia, the Movement Toward Socialism (MAS) party was banished at the ballot box on August 17. Its fall is a dramatic political realignment to the right for Bolivians, and a rare opportunity for the United States to reform relations with a geopolitically critical nation. As one expert, Leonardo Coutinho, told us, “The Trump administration can not only contribute to the restoration of democracy but also play a central role in dismantling a fully functioning narco-state.”

    Despite its 25 percent inflation rate and a 93 percent debt-to-GDP ratio, Bolivia is rich in natural resources, boasting some of the world’s largest lithium reserves, making it an attractive target for both American and Chinese grand strategies. Until now, the incumbent socialists aligned Bolivia with the anti-US alliance of China and Venezuela and created a lawless environment for cartels and criminal gangs to prosper. President Trump can reverse this to secure US supply chains and wound anti-American influence in a heavily contested theater.

    Mining developments have stalled under MAS mismanagement and red tape. Backed by Beijing and its broader strategy to dominate technology-critical supply chains, Chinese firms greased the palms of MAS legislators to secure privileged access to more than a billion dollars’ worth of lithium. Regulations restrict American investors, forcing them to form joint ventures with state-owned firms, strangling American-capital inflows. Hypercentralized China, meanwhile, with its ability to deploy large sums of capital with little regard to short-term costs, has constantly secured billionaire investments. Competition for mining bids long shaped Bolivia’s political system, encouraging mass corruption in a nation reliant on mining for income. This has empowered China and stalled US growth. 

    Bolivia’s ousted socialist government had also long extended its hand to Nicolás Maduro’s Venezuela. Worse yet, Venezuelan criminal elements have infiltrated Bolivia’s weak borders, turning it into a transit center for illicit activity, which has empowered the presence of Tren de Aragua, the Venezuelan gang that the US Department of State rightly designated a foreign terrorist organization this year. Evo Morales and Luis Arce also transformed Bolivia into a hub of cocaine production by enacting laws that expanded coca cultivation. The resulting drug trade has not only fueled smuggling into the United States but has also undermined stability in Brazil, Argentina, and across the continent at large.

    America First Policy Institute’s Melissa Ford Maldonado, who served as an electoral observer during the Bolivian election, told The Spectator that “This moment is not unique to Bolivia, but a part of a larger shift across our hemisphere.” She went on: “From Argentina to Ecuador, and now Bolivia, with elections ahead in Chile, Honduras, Costa Rica, Colombia, Brazil and beyond, people are turning away from the false promises of socialism and authoritarianism, and demanding real sovereignty, accountability, and change. The fight for democracy in the Americas may not be easy, but it is winnable, and it’s already happening.”

    Leonardo Coutinho, the executive director of the western hemisphere-focused Center for a Secure Free Society adds that the US has the unique opportunity “to support Bolivia in a process of institutional reconstruction that frees it both from the ideological legacy of Bolivarianism and from the capture exercised by narcotrafficking across different dimensions of national life, ranging from the illicit economy to the presidency itself.” Coutinho warned, however, that the MAS leader Evo Morales “remains a relevant political force.”

    To seize this opportunity, Trump must prepare a trade deal with Bolivia. In such a deal, Trump can leverage a current 15 percent reciprocal tariff, American development financing and access to the US market in exchange for US firms being allowed to acquire and operate mines in Bolivia.  

    Both viable MAS alternatives – Quiroga and Paz Pereira – appear open to this path. The task for Trump is simply to extend his hand while exerting the pressure needed to make it real. Coupled with this effort, the Trump administration can encourage renewed investigations into China’s lithium deals – leveraging the Bolivian case in its wider competition with the most formidable competitor the US has had in history. 

    The US’s diplomatic offensive, for which we still need a Senate-approved ambassador, should also push for renewed security partnerships to fight transnational terrorist organizations. Here, Trump can enlist the support of Argentine president Javier Milei, also the president of a once-leftist country leading a US realignment

    Such an approach would strengthen US credibility across South America and anchor Bolivia within a broader network of partners – providing a much-needed counterweight to the region’s socialist bloc.

    Trump has the chance to pull Bolivia back into America’s orbit and set the stage for shared prosperity. With decisive action, he can lock down lithium supply chains, break the grip of cartels and open a new chapter for the region – one in which the US proves it can lead not only by putting itself first, but also by lifting its neighborhood with it.

  • Will Venezuela crisis spill into conflict with US?

    Will Venezuela crisis spill into conflict with US?

    The authoritarian left wing regime of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro has mobilized his ruling Socialist party’s paramilitary militia in response to US President Donald Trump sending a task force of warships into Venezuelan waters as part of a US crackdown against alleged cocaine trafficking by the poverty-stricken country.

    Declaring that “no empire will touch the sacred soil of Venezuela “ Maduro sent his militia to reinforce the country’s borders with neighboring Colombia, who he has accused of collaborating with America in a pincer movement against his country.

    Trump has charged the Maduro regime with drugs trafficking on a massive scale, and the US Department of Justice has recently increased the reward it is offering for Maduro’s arrest and detention to $50 million, describing him as the “ world’s biggest narco trafficker”.

    Maduro, a former bus driver and Trade Union official, took over the Presidency in 2013 after the death from cancer of his charismatic but dictatorial predecessor Hugo Chávez. Together, the two men’s far left Socialist party has brought the oil rich but badly misgoverned state to its knees, a humanitarian crisis which has seen almost 8 million people flee the country for foreign destinations since 2014.

    That exodus represents a staggering one third of Venezuela’s total population of 29 million. The refugees have chiefly crossed the border into Colombia to escape hunger, unemployment, hyperinflation, and an acute shortage of basic food and goods: an economic and social catastrophe presided over by Maduro’s government which rules by dictatorial decrees rather than law.

    Only a year after taking office, Maduro used violence to put down widespread rioting by protesters against the economic chaos, and since then he has ruled by repression rather than consent. Only a year ago, Maduro “won” his third Presidential term in a contest widely condemned by international monitors and media as rigged. The opposition candidate, former diplomat Edmundo Gonzalez, fled to Spain in fear for his life after Maduro unilaterally declared himself the winner.

    The US and other western allies regard Maduro as an illicit dictator who only remains in power through a mix of cheating, corruption and repression, but although most members of the Middle class have long since left the country, Maduro still retains some residual support among the poorer masses.

    Thousands of such people lined up this week to register with the regime’s so-called Bolivaran militia, after Maduro charged Trump with interference in Venezuelan internal affairs and seeking regime change by sending in the naval task force.

    For his part, Trump is reacting against the double danger of desperate Venezuelan migrants flooding into the US, and the ravages caused by drugs made in Venezuela in US cities. As the US warships near the capital Caracas, this is clearly a crisis that could spill into violence.