January 14, 2026

Venezuela: ‘An Unstable Quagmire on a Sea of Dirty Oil’

Brilliant snatch operation comes with high-cost and little benefit

By Ambassador Luigi Einaudi

The lightning strike of January 3 that extracted President Maduro from Venezuela should be evaluated from several angles.

First, and very obviously, it was a brilliantly executed military and intelligence operation. Americans can be proud of the extraordinary military proficiency combined with astonishingly good intelligence, at least some of it clearly obtained from Venezuelans in both high and low positions.

Second, however, this success was inherently limited and even dangerous. The decision to launch was based on a narrow and militarized focus. Though many Venezuelans backed it willingly or because they were suborned, the basic fact is that the repressive system continues under a new façade. The removal of its most visible individual cog unsettles relations among the regime’s ruling gangs. A stable transition cannot begin without some form of accommodation between the population at large and those with guns. At a minimum, this will require the uniformed military and police to cease supporting the informal civilian colectivos that are the first line of repression. Until that happens, the result will be the same as after the 2024 election victory of the opposition: life will worsen.

World history has not been kind to democratic exiles, and few of the millions of Venezuelans who fled the country will return unless political and economic conditions markedly improve. Even just expanding Venezuela’s oil output will require investment guarantees, restoring technical capacity wiped out by emigration, and redeveloping markets for heavy oil in a world market already showing signs of glut. The strike, in short, has turned Venezuela into an unstable quagmire sitting on a sea of dirty oil that cannot be produced without long-term stability. If conditions in Venezuela had been considered less subjectively, this operation would not have been undertaken.

Third, the operation has seriously damaged the United States in the hemisphere and the world in ways unrecoverable in the short term. The undisguised departure from the principles of the international order built by the generation that won World War Two is a destabilizing shock that weakens the United States everywhere. And it comes, ironically, at a moment when the United States has weakened the economic and diplomatic institutions, both domestic (AID and State) and international (consider the January 7 withdrawal from 66 international organizations and treaties), now needed to help stabilize Venezuela and restore its hollowed out institutions.

Finally, the strike was so high risk that it could induce unwarranted confidence in those who ordered it. Yet even the domestic political returns are dubious. Miami does not represent most American Latins, who are overwhelmingly of Mexican descent. And our belligerent imperial unilateralism leaves us bereft of allies with which to face the quagmire. What lies ahead is either escalation or coverup, with precious little benefit for Venezuela or the United States but much turmoil for the neighborhood.

For more on Venezuela from Ambassador Einaudi, listen to his recent podcast episode titled “Operation Just Cause and Venezuela.”

·                     CSIS: https://www.csis.org/podcasts/35-west/operation-just-cause-and-venezuela

·                     Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0CJcACgKq1FKmafp9bd4Gp

·                     Apple podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/35-west/id1476872871

Readers are encouraged to discuss this article and related topics in our discussion forum, linked here: What’s next for Venezuela and the U.S.?

Share the Post:

Wilson Center

Forced displacement represents one of the most pressing humanitarian issues of our time. Individuals and families, torn from the fabric of their communities, find themselves navigating a world of uncertainty, often without basic necessities or a clear path to safety. There are currently some 110 million forced displaced, and this number is growing by 10 million each year!

At the heart of this crisis are the political triggers. Armed conflicts, ethnic or religious persecutions, and systemic human rights abuses force millions to flee their homes in terror. Many are displaced within their own national boundaries, while others seek asylum abroad. If these factors change as a result of political shifts at home or the pressures from abroad, they can return to their homes. Forced displacement is thus different from environmentally driven displacement, as victims of climate change may never be able to return to their homes.

The ramifications of any sort of displacement are profound, not just for those directly affected, but also for host communities and countries. Overburdened infrastructures, socio-economic strains, and cultural tensions can arise, necessitating comprehensive strategies to foster harmony and integration. Yet the root causes of forced displacement can be remedied with a concerted focus by local players and international diplomacy.

Organizations like Refugees International play a crucial role in this arena, advocating for the rights and needs of the displaced, conducting on-the-ground assessments, and influencing policymakers to take informed actions. Their relentless work underscores the gravity of the situation and the urgency ofinternational cooperation. But they, too, are overwhelmed by the rapid expansion of the crisis.

International Humanitarian Law (IHL), with its core principles centered on the protection of civilians during conflicts, plays a pivotal role in this discourse. Yet, despite clear legal frameworks, compliance remains
inconsistent. This initiative emphasizes the importance of upholding and reinforcing these international standards.

It’s not just about recognizing the problem; it’s about active engagement. We urge governments, organizations, and individuals to prioritize the rights and needs of the forced displaced. Through collective efforts, informed policies, and sustained advocacy, we can shift the narrative from passive acknowledgment to proactive intervention.