标签： South America

The dramatic capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro by U.S. forces has ignited complex reactions within President Trump’s political base, revealing fissures in the “America First” coalition. While initial applause greeted the surgical operation that extracted Maduro from a military compound to a Brooklyn cell, underlying tensions emerged regarding long-term foreign entanglements.

The raid represents a geopolitical pivot for an administration that campaigned against nation-building abroad. Trump supporters from Michigan to Mississippi expressed admiration for the operation’s precision but voiced concerns about potential escalation. Aaron Tobin, a Detroit-area supporter, envisioned cinematic potential in the raid while acknowledging the narrative remains in its opening chapter.

Contrasting perspectives emerged across battleground states. In Colorado, Travis Garcia celebrated the capture of a “dictator constantly sending drugs our way,” seeing it as validation of Trump’s strong leadership. Yet nearby, retired engineer Patrick McCans noted the intervention contradicted campaign promises, preferring diplomatic solutions despite acknowledging possible justification.

Pennsylvania supporters demonstrated cautious optimism. Retired firefighter Kevin Carey recalled the 1979 Iran hostage crisis as a cautionary tale, while 88-year-old Ron Soto expressed unwavering faith in Trump’s ability to “straighten that country out.” The operation’s clinical execution drew widespread praise, though many emphasized their support depended on avoiding prolonged conflict.

The episode forced supporters to reconcile Trump’s non-interventionist rhetoric with expanding hemispheric ambitions. Mississippi electrician apprentice Chase Lewis typified this conflict, praising Venezuelan liberation while worrying about military deployment costs and potential mission creep. Even enthusiastic supporters like Michigan’s Tobin conditioned further support on maintaining casualty-free operations.

As the administration faces challenges from Epstein file controversies to rising living costs, the Venezuela operation represents both a unifying victory and a potential stress test for Trump’s coalition. The coming weeks will determine whether this bold action strengthens political bonds or exposes fundamental contradictions in the America First doctrine.

Residents of Caracas have voiced divergent perspectives regarding recent US military activities and President Nicolás Maduro’s subsequent actions, revealing deep divisions within Venezuelan society. The BBC Mundo conducted street interviews capturing firsthand accounts from citizens navigating the complex geopolitical landscape affecting their nation.

Many interviewees expressed profound concerns about sovereignty issues, with some characterizing external military operations as violations of international law while others viewed them as necessary interventions. The interviews revealed how Venezuela’s prolonged economic crisis and political instability have shaped contrasting viewpoints on foreign involvement.

President Maduro’s seizure of certain authorities in response to the military operation generated particularly strong reactions. Several citizens described the move as an expected consolidation of power, while others perceived it as an infringement upon democratic principles. The testimonies highlighted how daily struggles for basic necessities influence political perspectives more than ideological considerations.

The reports indicate that Venezuela’s situation remains fluid, with the population demonstrating both wariness of foreign intervention and frustration with domestic leadership. These street-level perspectives provide crucial context for understanding the human dimension of international diplomatic tensions, beyond official statements from either government.

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump confronted Democratic criticism of the military operation that resulted in the capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, highlighting that his predecessor Joe Biden had similarly pursued Maduro’s arrest on narcotics charges. Speaking at a House Republican retreat, Trump expressed frustration over what he perceived as insufficient acknowledgment from political opponents regarding the successful mission.

The operation, which culminated in Maduro’s apprehension over the weekend, has ignited complex debates about U.S. foreign policy direction. While bipartisan consensus exists that Maduro illegitimately holds power following disputed elections, Democratic leaders have questioned the administration’s strategic planning for Venezuela’s future.

Maduro, indicted in 2020 on charges of narco-terrorism and international cocaine trafficking, pleaded not guilty in a U.S. courtroom Monday. The Trump administration had doubled the reward for information leading to his capture to $50 million last August, building on previous offers from the Biden administration.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio briefed congressional leaders Monday amid growing concerns about potential U.S. expansionism without adequate legislative consultation. House Speaker Mike Johnson subsequently clarified that no troop deployments to Venezuela were anticipated, characterizing U.S. actions as “not a regime change operation.”

Recent polling indicates divided American public opinion, with approximately 40% supporting the military operation against Maduro and similar numbers opposing it. Nearly half of respondents opposed U.S. control of Venezuela’s government selection, with overwhelming majority believing Venezuelans should determine their own leadership.

The operation has triggered international repercussions, with Colombia’s Foreign Affairs Minister Rosa Villavicencio formally complaining about Trump’s threats against the nation. Simultaneously, European leaders including those of France, Germany, and the United Kingdom joined Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen in defending Greenland’s sovereignty following Trump’s renewed interest in acquiring the territory for U.S. security interests.

Venezuelan security forces detained at least 14 journalists on Monday amid heightened political turmoil following the capture of President Nicolás Maduro by US forces. The detentions occurred as Delcy Rodríguez assumed the role of interim president, marking a significant escalation in the government’s suppression of information.

According to Venezuela’s media workers union, the majority of those detained were foreign correspondents, with all but one released later that day. One reporter faced deportation. The journalists were apprehended at multiple locations including the National Assembly building and the Altamira district in Caracas, where Rodríguez was being sworn into office.

The detained media professionals underwent extensive equipment searches, with authorities examining their phones, social media posts, and private messages. In a separate incident, Colombian and Spanish reporters were held incommunicado for hours at the Venezuela-Colombia border near Cúcuta before being released back into Colombia.

This press crackdown coincides with Rodríguez’s declaration of willingness to cooperate with the Trump administration, which has previously stated its intention to ‘run’ Venezuela following Maduro’s capture in a military operation that resulted in numerous casualties among his security detail.

The repression extends beyond journalists to the general population. Residents report armed, masked groups patrolling neighborhoods, checking citizens’ WhatsApp statuses and messages for critical content. A heavy presence of police, military, and pro-government armed groups known as ‘colectivos’ has created an atmosphere of fear throughout Caracas.

Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello publicly showcased security forces’ visibility in communities, posting images of himself with armed police on social media. Meanwhile, anonymous sources describe military personnel on every corner and armed civilian groups instilling fear among the population.

This incident continues a pattern of media suppression in Venezuela, where foreign news organizations face significant visa restrictions. The current situation echoes the post-2024 election crackdown when security forces similarly monitored digital communications, leading many Venezuelans to delete their social media accounts and message histories.

According to human rights organization Foro Penal, Venezuela currently holds over 800 political prisoners as of January 5, with many previously sentenced to lengthy prison terms for ‘treason’ following the disputed 2024 presidential election.

British Cabinet Minister Kemi Badenoch has characterized the recent US military intervention in Venezuela as “morally justified” despite acknowledging uncertainties surrounding its legal foundations. In a BBC Radio 4 interview, the Conservative leader expressed support for the operation that resulted in the extraction of President Nicolás Maduro, whom she described as leading a “brutal regime.

The controversial military action, which unfolded over the weekend, involved US forces apprehending Maduro and his wife in Caracas while conducting simultaneous strikes on Venezuelan military installations. The deposed leader and his spouse currently face serious charges in New York courts, including weapon and drug trafficking offenses related to alleged cocaine smuggling operations.

While maintaining her moral endorsement of the intervention, Badenoch conceded that the operation “raise[s] serious questions about the rules-based order.” Drawing from personal experience having grown up under Nigerian military rule, she emphasized her understanding of authoritarian governance, stating she “know[s] what it’s like to have someone like Maduro in charge.”

The UK government has adopted a carefully measured stance regarding the incident, avoiding direct condemnation of potential international law violations while continuing to recognize Maduro as an “illegitimate president.” This position has drawn criticism from opposition parties including Labour, Liberal Democrats, Greens, and SNP, who have collectively demanded explicit condemnation of what they characterize as illegal actions by the Trump administration.

In a related geopolitical development, the interview addressed President Trump’s renewed interest in Greenland, with Badenoch drawing clear distinctions between the situations. She emphasized that “there is a big difference between democratic states” and Venezuela, which she termed a “gangster state,” noting that Greenland’s future should remain exclusively with Denmark and its people.

Health Secretary Wes Streeting subsequently elaborated on the government’s differentiated approach, explaining that Denmark’s NATO membership and the absence of British national security concerns regarding Greenland justified the contrasting responses to the two situations.

Meanwhile, Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper has engaged in diplomatic communications with US counterpart Marco Rubio, reminding him of international legal obligations while maintaining the UK position that the United States must provide its own legal justification for the operation.

The developments have sparked concerns among some foreign policy experts, including Labour MP Emily Thornberry, who chairs the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee. Critics warn that the US action potentially emboldens rival powers like Russia and China while undermining international legal norms.

President Trump has committed to overseeing Venezuelan governance during what he terms a “proper” transition of power, with Vice-President Delcy Rodríguez assuming interim presidential duties pending establishment of a new governmental structure.

In an unusual departure from its typically adversarial relationship with the press, the Trump administration has publicly thanked major news organizations for exercising restraint in reporting sensitive military information. The gratitude follows last weekend’s successful U.S. military operation in Venezuela that resulted in the capture of President Nicolás Maduro.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio specifically acknowledged that several prominent media outlets, including The New York Times and The Washington Post, had obtained advance knowledge of the planned strike but deliberately withheld publication to prevent compromising operational security and endangering American lives. This recognition marks a significant moment in the administration’s frequently contentious relationship with the press corps.

The administration’s appreciation emerges against the backdrop of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s implementation of restrictive press regulations at the Pentagon, which have prompted most mainstream news organizations to vacate their assigned positions rather than comply with what they consider excessive constraints. Hegseth has consistently cited concerns about journalists’ handling of classified information as justification for these measures.

According to reports from Semafor, administration officials engaged in direct communications with news organizations regarding the Venezuela operation. Veteran national security reporter Dana Priest, now a professor at the University of Maryland, emphasized that such discretion represents standard practice for reputable news organizations when lives are at stake.

The complex dynamics of national security reporting were further illustrated by incidents such as The Atlantic editor Jeffrey Goldberg’s accidental inclusion in a text chain revealing details about a Yemen operation last spring. Goldberg waited until all personnel were safe and information was verified before publishing.

Historical precedents include President John F. Kennedy’s successful persuasion of The New York Times to withhold information about the Bay of Pigs invasion—a decision later regretted when the mission failed spectacularly. This tension between national security interests and the public’s right to knowledge continues to define the delicate balance media organizations must maintain.

Despite administrative pressures, journalists remain committed to their fundamental mission of informing the public while exercising appropriate judgment regarding operational security, according to Priest, who characterized the Pentagon’s current rules as ‘ridiculously broad censorship.’

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump is convening with House Republicans on Tuesday for a comprehensive policy forum at a pivotal juncture in the midterm election cycle. This gathering occurs as the GOP navigates a razor-thin legislative majority and internal party tensions that could significantly influence Trump’s final two years in office.

The daylong strategic session will take place at the Kennedy Center performing arts venue, recently renamed the Trump-Kennedy Center by its Trump-loyalist board—a controversial decision currently facing legal challenges. The location choice marks a departure from typical Capitol or nearby off-campus venues traditionally used for political discussions, with the Speaker’s office offering no explanation for this unconventional selection.

Key agenda items include healthcare legislation, particularly the extension of expired insurance subsidies expected for vote this week. The party also aims to advance its signature tax-and-border legislation while developing a broader affordability platform ahead of midterm elections. Republicans are additionally considering a second tax bill that could pass through party-line voting, while simultaneously confronting the possibility of a partial government shutdown by month’s end.

The meeting occurs against a backdrop of diminishing GOP cohesion. With Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene’s resignation reducing their majority to 219-213, Republican leadership faces increased challenges in maintaining party discipline. Rank-and-file lawmakers have demonstrated growing willingness to defy both Trump and leadership priorities, as evidenced in recent debates surrounding the Jeffrey Epstein document releases.

Furthermore, the administration’s recent capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro has reignited constitutional debates regarding presidential war powers, though House Republicans have largely supported these foreign policy actions. This development follows an extended campaign involving US military buildup in South American waters and targeted strikes on alleged drug trafficking vessels.

AP Congressional Correspondent Lisa Mascaro contributed to this reporting.

Top U.S. administration officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, conducted a classified briefing for congressional leaders on Monday regarding the recent military intervention in Venezuela. The two-hour session revealed significant divisions between Republican and Democratic lawmakers concerning President Trump’s decision to forcibly remove Nicolás Maduro from power without prior congressional consultation.

Republican leadership, including House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), expressed support for the operation, characterizing it as a necessary measure to combat narcoterrorism and drug trafficking rather than regime change. Johnson emphasized economic coercion through seized oil exports as the primary tool for compelling behavioral changes in Venezuela’s interim government.

Democratic leaders emerged from the briefing with substantial concerns. Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) and Representative Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) questioned the operation’s financial costs and long-term strategic vision. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer warned that this action potentially initiates a dangerous new approach to foreign policy that could extend to other nations like Colombia, Cuba, and Greenland.

The administration’s delayed notification to Congress about the ongoing military operation raised constitutional questions, particularly regarding war powers. A resolution prohibiting further military action in Venezuela without congressional approval is scheduled for a Senate vote this week.

Internal divisions also appeared within Republican ranks. Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) criticized the operation as unconstitutional and a dangerous precedent, while Senator Rick Scott (R-Fla.) expressed support for opposition leader María Corina Machado as a future democratic leader. The administration’s sidelining of established Venezuelan opposition figures in favor of interim President Delcy Rodríguez, a Maduro ally, further complicated the political landscape.