It seems this was the culmination of months – or more? – of planning, with signals and warnings for Maduro to go into exile or else. Now we see the “or else.”
There are also rumors that it’s all staged and Maduro cooperated. I definitely don’t think that’s the case.He almost certainly could have absconded to one of his sponsor states instead. They may not be paradises, but they’re better than US prison.
Trump is now saying that we’ll be running Venezuela till the new government takes over:
We’re going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper, and judicious transition. So we don’t want to be involved with having somebody else get in. And we have the same situation that we had for the last long period of years. So we are going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper, and judicious transition, and it has to be judicious, because that’s what we’re all about.
We want peace, liberty and justice for the great people of Venezuela, and that includes many from Venezuela who are now living in the United States and want to go back to their country as their homeland.
We can’t take a chance that somebody else takes over Venezuela, that doesn’t have the good of the Venezuelan people in mind for decades. We’re not going to let that happen. …
We are ready to stage a second and much larger attack if we need to do so. So we were prepared to do a second wave if we needed to do so.
I figured they had a plan at the outset. But what is that plan, how long will it take, and will it be successful? Trump’s not a big one for lengthy neoconnish nation-building endeavors, but does this threaten to become that? There’s a president and/or VP waiting in the wings in exile, Machado and Gonzalez who actually were elected in the previous election in Venezuela, as was widely acknowledged at the time. So if anyone is the legitimate leader of Venezuela, it would be one or both of them. But how can their installation be facilitated? The regime itself, minus Maduro, will almost certainly want to hang onto power, or at least some of the cast of characters will (I listed them in my previous post on the subject).
We’re learning a bit more about the action itself, from Chairman John Daniel Caine:
“This operation, known as Operation Absolute Resolve, was discreet, precise, and conducted during the darkest hours of January 2, and was the culmination of months of planning and rehearsal, an operation that, frankly, only the United States military could undertake.”
Chairman Caine continued.
“This particular mission required every component of our joint force with soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and guardians, working in unison with our intelligence agency partners and law enforcement teammates in an unprecedented operation, we leveraged our unmatched intelligence capabilities and our years of experience in hunting terrorists, and we could not have done this mission without the incredible work by various intelligence agencies, including the CIA, NSA and NGA.”
There’s a very interesting post at Althouse covering the different takes of the WaPo and NY Times on this:
I’m [Althouse, that is] reading “Trump’s bold capture of Maduro was a victory for America. What’s next?” by The Editorial Board of The Washington Post. That’s the front page headline. Inside it’s “Justice in Venezuela/The next challenge is setting the country up for long-term success.”
The editorial ends: “For years, Maduro was a symbol of the false warmth of Latin American collectivism. Now he should spend the rest of his life in a humane American prison. His downfall is good news.”
That’s astounding on two levels. The first is that it seems to contain elements of praise for Trump, and the second is the rather obvious reference to the inaugural speech of the odious Mamdani (I covered that in this post, where Mamdani is quoted as having said: “We will replace the frigidity of rugged individualism with the warmth of collectivism”).
The Times is not as pleased as the WaPo:
Anyway, the WaPo editors seem rather positive about Trump’s action in Venezuela. The mood at The New York Times is different: “Trump’s Attack on Venezuela Is Illegal and Unwise.” It ends:
“We will hold out hope that the current crisis will end less badly than we expect. We fear that the result of Mr. Trump’s adventurism is increased suffering for Venezuelans, rising regional instability and lasting damage for America’s interests around the world. We know that Mr. Trump’s warmongering violates the law.”
It doesn’t violate the precedent I discussed in my earlier post, the Noriega case. Jonathan Turley also doesn’t think it violates the law; I hadn’t seen his comment when I wrote my earlier piece, but here it is:
The administration is acting within the navigational beacons of the Noriega case. And by the way, for all these Democrats objecting, the authority that Trump could cite is Barack Obama. Barack Obama vaporized a US citizen without a criminal charge. One would think that if a president could do that, and I don’t remember Democrats objecting en masse that you could arrest someone for trial with an existing indictment.
You can see some photos of Venezuelans around the world celebrating.
And it’s been announced that Maduro has landed in NY:
The aircraft believed to be carrying Nicolas Maduro has touched down at Stewart Airport in Orange County, New York, Saturday afternoon, sources familiar with the matter told ABC News.
Maduro is now expected to take a helicopter to New York City, accompanied by the DEA. He will then head by motorcade to a location in New York City for processing before he’s held in jail, sources said.
