The US may want many of its foes gone from power. It doesn't usually send in the military and physically remove them.
Venezuela's abrupt awakening took two forms.
Its residents were woken abruptly to the sound of deafening booms: the sound of its capital Caracas under attack from US strikes targeting military infrastructure.
Its government has now woken up from any illusion that US military intervention or regime change was just a distant threat.
US President Donald Trump has announced its leader, Nicolás Maduro, has been captured and flown out of the country. He now faces weapons and drugs charges. His exact whereabouts are unknown, and his colleagues have demanded proof he is still alive.
The US has not carried out direct military intervention in Latin America like this since its 1989 invasion of Panama to depose the then-military ruler, Manuel Noriega.
Back then, like now, Washington framed this as part of a wider crackdown on drug trafficking and criminality.
The US has long accused Maduro too of leading a criminal trafficking organization, something he strongly denies. It designated as a foreign terrorist group the 'Cartel de los Soles' - a name the US uses to describe a group of elites in Venezuela who allegedly orchestrate illegal activities like drug trafficking and illegal mining.
This latest operation, striking inside a sovereign capital directly, marks a dramatic escalation in US engagement in the region.
The forcible removal of Maduro will be hailed as a major victory by some of the more hawkish figures within the US administration, many of whom have argued that only direct intervention could force Maduro from power.
Washington has not recognized him as the country's president since the 2024 elections were widely dismissed by international observers as neither free nor fair.
For Venezuela's government, this intervention confirms what it has long claimed: that Washington's ultimate goal is regime change.
However, many critics caution that US intervention could trigger violent fragmentation and a prolonged power struggle. Even some who oppose Maduro caution against relying on US intervention, recalling decades of US-backed coups and regime change in Latin America.
The opposition itself is divided; not all back a transition to opposition leader Maria Corina Machado or her support for Trump.
What remains deeply unclear is what comes next inside Venezuela itself. The US would clearly like the Venezuelan opposition, which it is allied with, to take power, potentially either led by opposition leader Maria Corina Machado or the opposition candidate from the 2024 elections, Edmundo Gonzalez.
However, some strong critics of Maduro warn this would not be simple, given the government's control over the judiciary, military, and aligned paramilitary forces known as 'colectivos.'
As for Trump, his administration has become increasingly muscular in the region, with military interventions accompanied by economic measures like financial bailouts and tariffs aimed at influencing politics in neighboring countries.
In the wake of Maduro's capture, questions arise not only about the future of Venezuela but also about the implications for US relations in the region, particularly given that some significant powers, such as Brazil and Colombia, do not support US military intervention.
