It can be said from the outset that Republican US President Donald Trump has come to represent a genuine threat to international law and to the body of legal rules governing international relations, which are meant to safeguard the sovereignty of peoples and their right to self determination free from external interference.
What occurred following the arrest of former Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro constitutes a real rupture with the normative and value based frameworks accumulated by humanity since the Second World War.
Many questions arise within this sensitive moment in the history of the Bolivarian state and of Latin American countries more broadly, particularly those that do not align with US strategic interests. Among them are Mexico, Colombia, Nicaragua, and Cuba.
What scenarios are envisaged for the post Maduro phase? What truly motivates President Trump? Is it the promotion of democracy and the universalisation of global human rights standards, or is it a matter of narrowly defined American interests tied to fossil energy resources such as oil and gas, as well as precious minerals required by advanced US industries, especially given that Venezuela holds the largest proven oil reserves in the world?
How effective is international law in managing the excess power of a state such as the United States? Where is humanity heading, particularly in light of Trump’s threats to occupy Denmark’s Greenland, his expressed desire to install his Secretary of State Marco Rubio as president of Cuba, and his willingness to silence any opposing voice, even if it comes from a European or Western ally or a member of NATO?
The Monroe Doctrine as a conceptual framework for understanding current events
This doctrine is associated with US President James Monroe, who held office between 1817 and 1825. The Monroe Doctrine functioned as a political cover for the United States’ desire to extend its influence and dominance over its strategic depth in Latin America, viewed as a natural extension of its national security. It served as a justification for interference in the internal affairs of neighbouring states.
Today, this doctrine has clearly returned to the forefront of US foreign policy, particularly following the announcement on 5 December 2025 of the US National Security Strategy document.
This document can be regarded as a reordering of American priorities and a redefinition of the United States’ strategic and geopolitical position in the world, after nearly four decades of traditional commitments that have not always served US strategic and economic interests, such as guaranteeing Israel’s security and that of its allies in the Middle East, and ensuring the safety of maritime routes for international trade.
This issue does not concern the United States alone. Rather, it implies that all countries should engage in such struggles in order to safeguard global peace and security, as inferred from the content of the document.
The National Security Strategy represents a development of the Monroe Doctrine’s principles, which fundamentally prioritise protecting American interests and national security within the Americas, while supporting states aligned with US strategic interests in the region and excluding the influence and intervention of China, Russia, and the European Union, which are barred under the doctrine from entering the sphere of American presence and influence.
This explains US Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth’s pledge to restore US military dominance over the Western Hemisphere, as well as Washington’s practical move to revise its national security policies towards neighbouring states, treating them as strategic depth.
This approach became evident in the arrest of Nicolas Maduro on 3 January 2026, the threats to change the political system in Cuba, the repeated warnings about occupying Denmark’s Greenland, and efforts to sow divisions within NATO, after a group of countries including France, Germany, Sweden, and Norway deployed troops there. This was a signal to Trump intended to deter him from any action that could harm the collective security and strategic interests of the alliance.
Three influential variables shaping post Maduro scenarios
First
Delcy Rodriguez, Venezuela’s interim president following approval from the Supreme Court and backing from the military, which is considered part of the Bolivarian revolutionary movement, appeared before the Venezuelan parliament on 15 January 2026 to present the annual government management report. This is a constitutional tradition of the Federal Legislative Palace, as it is known in Bolivarian Venezuela, and the session was attended by ambassadors from several foreign states and government officials.
This year’s session differed from previous ones. A series of draft laws were presented under the parliamentary dome, signalling that Venezuela may be entering a new phase of attracting foreign capital to exploit its energy resources and channel revenues into social sectors such as health, education, other social services, and infrastructure.
These sectors had suffered from poor management during the years of former president Nicolas Maduro’s rule.
The first bill presented by the interim president concerned reforming legislation related to energy sources and the hydrocarbons sector in order to attract foreign investment. This was described as a necessary step to revitalise the sector and strengthen social justice, particularly given that many oil fields require massive investment that the state budget cannot bear.
She also explained to parliament that the pricing system across commercial and economic sectors is based on agreed principles and that manipulation is prohibited.
The second organic bill focused on protecting social and economic rights, pointing to the allocation of oil revenues to vital social sectors harmed by previous governance and social management policies.
A third bill, known as the Law on Accelerating Administrative Procedures, was presented as a response to the economic blockade facing Venezuela. Its primary aim is to encourage foreign capital to enter Venezuela to invest in oil field infrastructure.
From within parliament, the interim president affirmed that the legal team had been tasked with continuing work to strengthen and consolidate the legal framework facilitating foreign investment, in order to reinforce social protection and achieve social justice for Venezuelan citizens.
It is also noteworthy that Delcy Rodriguez stressed before parliamentarians that US aggression against Venezuela represents a dark chapter in relations between the two countries. She confirmed that the political context following the aggression of 3 January 2026 pushed Venezuela to adopt a diplomatic option to end the dispute. She also affirmed Venezuela’s right to strengthen its political and diplomatic relations with China, Russia, Iran, Cuba, and all countries of the world, including the United States, as a free and sovereign state.
Whether considering the statements of interim president Delcy Rodriguez or those of her brother Jorge Rodriguez, the Speaker of the Venezuelan parliament, it is clear that there is an attempt to inaugurate a new phase in Venezuela’s political history. This comes despite her emphasis that the premises and content of the Monroe Doctrine contradict the aspirations of the Bolivarian movement, and that the natural place of Nicolas Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores is Venezuela.
Second
On the same day, 15 January 2026, Delcy Rodriguez received US Central Intelligence Agency Director John Ratcliffe. He was the highest ranking US official to visit the country on an assignment from President Donald Trump, two weeks after the arrest of President Nicolas Maduro, according to US media reports.
The meeting lasted two hours and aimed to open communication channels and build an atmosphere of trust between the two countries. The discussions also covered prospects for economic cooperation and coordination to prevent Venezuela from becoming a refuge for US adversaries.
Third
Also on 15 January 2026, Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Corina Machado met with US President Donald Trump at the White House in Washington to discuss Venezuela’s future and its role in the political transition process.
Machado had been barred from running in the 2024 presidential election, which resulted in the victory of opposition figure and diplomat Edmundo Gonzalez, who has been recognised as president by numerous countries worldwide, despite the fact that official election records have yet to be published.
President Trump is aware that the Venezuelan opposition leader lacks the qualifications to lead the next phase, according to statements by White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt.
For this reason, he is placing his bet on interim president Delcy Rodriguez, who has given more than one indication of her determination to open a new chapter in relations with the United States, one that is markedly different from the previous period.
Is this an internal political dispute whose time has come to be resolved within the Bolivarian revolutionary movement in Venezuela, between the faction aligned with Nicolas Maduro and another seeking to exert pressure on Delcy Rodriguez? Or is it a new and unexpected context that has compelled all parties to manage a delicate and difficult phase in Venezuela’s history, one that takes account of the nature of the moment without gambling with the movement’s principles and horizons?
