The 'Putinization' of US Foreign Policy: A New Era of Aggression and Uncertainty
The year 2026 began with a jolt, as the world witnessed the overnight strikes on Venezuela and the abduction of its leader, Nicolás Maduro, and his wife. This brazen act has shattered international law and global norms, marking a significant shift in US foreign policy.
Since Donald Trump's inauguration, he has been dismantling the fragile edifice of international relations, one bulldozer at a time. The events in Venezuela are just the latest in a series of aggressive actions, including airstrikes on small boats in Central American waters, the killing of their crews on unproven drug trafficking allegations, and the armed seizure of Venezuelan oil tankers. The capture of Maduro in the early hours of Saturday remains shrouded in uncertainty, with the number of casualties unknown.
The real concern lies in the fact that Trump's actions are working. His belief in his global omnipotence and desire for territorial expansion and natural resources have been unchecked by his fear of entanglement in foreign wars. Trump's claim to have ended eight wars and his ambition for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2025 highlight his desire for global recognition. However, his recent actions suggest a shift in focus.
The Maduro operation, carried out with efficiency by American soldiers, thrilled Trump and showcased his growing confidence in military power. This is particularly concerning given his diminishing popularity and the Epstein child-trafficking scandal. The attack on Venezuela, initially planned for Christmas Day, indicates that the allure of foreign lands, oil, and minerals now outweighs the Nobel Prize in Trump's eyes.
The Trump administration's legal justifications for the attack are questionable. Maduro, a dictator since 2013, has been in power with the help of widely rigged elections. The specific drug allegations against him are seen as flimsy by experts and would not hold up under international or US law. Trump's statements reveal his primary interest in Venezuela's oil reserves, the largest in the world, rather than delivering democracy.
The operation in Venezuela mirrors the 1990 invasion of Panama by the first Bush administration, which forced the surrender of its strongman. This pattern of hypocrisy is not new, as previous presidents have claimed exceptions from international laws for US interests while mostly adhering to global norms. However, Trump's disdain for the 'rules-based system' is evident, as he views the world through the lens of a 19th-century imperialist with 21st-century weapons.
The future of Venezuela remains uncertain, with the current regime's resistance unknown. A peaceful outcome seems unlikely, and the actions of the Trump administration will have far-reaching consequences. Governments like Iran and Denmark, against whom Trump has expressed enthusiasm for radical action, are now on high alert.
In recent days, Trump has shown support for Iranian anti-government protesters and threatened to take control of Greenland by any means necessary. The Danish Defence Intelligence Service's labeling of the US as a security risk is a stark reminder of the changing dynamics. This acceleration from a rules-based world to one of competing spheres of influence, determined by armed might, has been dubbed the 'Putinization of US foreign policy' by American commentator David Rothkopf.
The implications of this shift are profound, as Latin America and Eastern Europe may fall under the shadow of the US and Russia, respectively. Vladimir Putin's views on Eastern Europe and Xi Jinping's potential conclusions are significant. The peril made evident in the first few days of 2026 is a global concern, and the world must prepare for a new era of uncertainty and aggression.
