Ongoing reports and analysis

Early on Saturday morning, U.S. President Donald Trump announced that the United States had attacked Venezuela and captured President Nicolás Maduro and his wife. It is hard to exaggerate the historical significance of these events.

Whatever one thinks of Maduro’s catastrophic rule—or of Trump’s stated objectives to “run” the country and take control of its oil reserves—the use of overt U.S. military force against a South American government marks a profound rupture of regional precedent. Its consequences will extend far beyond Venezuela itself.

Early on Saturday morning, U.S. President Donald Trump announced that the United States had attacked Venezuela and captured President Nicolás Maduro and his wife. It is hard to exaggerate the historical significance of these events.

Whatever one thinks of Maduro’s catastrophic rule—or of Trump’s stated objectives to “run” the country and take control of its oil reserves—the use of overt U.S. military force against a South American government marks a profound rupture of regional precedent. Its consequences will extend far beyond Venezuela itself.

Many analysts have described the U.S. military strikes on Venezuela as the first direct U.S. military intervention in Latin America since Panama in 1989. However, that framing understates the significance of what has just occurred in Caracas. Latin America is not a single strategic space; ties between South and Central American countries can be limited.

Trump’s toppling of Maduro is the first time that the United States has launched overt military strikes against a South American government aimed at regime change. (Washington covertly supported several dictatorships on the continent during the Cold War.) For a region that has long prided itself on being among the world’s lowest-risk geopolitical zones—largely free of interstate war—Maduro’s ouster is a watershed moment.

From the perspective of South American........

© Foreign Policy