Nicolas Maduro

Jan. 6 (UPI) — Switzerland has frozen any assets in the country owned by U.S.-detained Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and others associated with him to ensure that if they were stolen from the Venezuelan people, they can be rightly returned.

The asset freeze went immediately into effect when it was announced on Monday, but does not impact members of the current Venezuelan government, Switzerland’s Federal Council said in a statement.

The freeze is to prevent funds from leaving the country. In the case that future legal proceedings show that the assets were illicitly acquired, Switzerland said it will “endeavor to ensure that they benefit the Venezuelan people.”

“The Federal Council wants to ensure that any illicitly acquired assets cannot be transferred out of Switzerland in the current situation,” it said. “It has therefore decided, as a precautionary measure, to freeze any assets held in Switzerland by Mr. Maduro and others associated with him.”

Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, were captured by the U.S. military in an early Saturday operation that involved air and ground assets in Caracas. Dozens of people were killed. There were no U.S. military casualties.

The authoritarian Venezuelan president has been indicted in the United States on narcotrafficking and other related drug charges. The operation has raised domestic and international legal questions over Maduro’s detention and has drawn condemnation, including from U.S. allies.

On Monday, Maduro and his wife pleaded not guilty to the charges, and Vice President Delcy Rodriguez was sworn in as the country’s new president.

Switzerland called for de-escalation, restraint and compliance with international law following the United States’ Saturday military operation and said it was “closely monitoring” the situation.

The new asset freeze is in addition to sanctions imposed against Venezuela under Switzerland’s Embargo Act in 2018. The new measure targets the assets of 37 individuals who were not previously blacklisted by sanctions, according to an ordinance on the action. Maduro’s wife and other relatives were named.

Switzerland said neither the reason for Maduro’s ousting nor whether it was legal plays a role in its decision to apply the asset freeze.

“The decisive factor is that a fall from power has occurred and that it is now possible that the country of origin will initiate legal proceedings in the future with regard to illicitly acquired assets,” the Federal Council said.

The freeze will remain in place for four years.

Caracas, January 5, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores have pleaded not guilty to charges of “narcoterrorism” after being arraigned on Monday.

During a short session in a New York court, Maduro told Judge Alvin Hellerstein that he was the president of Venezuela and had been “illegally captured” in his Caracas home.

The Venezuelan leader was kidnapped by US special operations forces in the early hours of January 3 following US bombings against military installations.

He was indicted on charges of “narcoterrorism conspiracy, cocaine importation conspiracy, possession of machineguns and destructive devices, and conspiracy to possess machineguns and destructive devices against the United States.” Flores faces the same charges except narco-terrorism conspiracy.

Maduro is being represented by Barry Pollack, who previously defended Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. Pollack did not request bail but questioned the legality of Maduro’s “military abduction” and stressed that the Venezuelan leader is “entitled to the privilege” of being treated like a head of state.

Flores’ attorney, Mark Donnelly, said that her client had sustained “significant injuries during her abduction” and requested that she receive medical attention.

The trial is set to resume with a hearing on March 17.

US officials have issued repeated “narcoterrorism” accusations against Maduro and other high-ranking Venezuelan leaders over the years. However, they have never produced court-tested evidence to sustain the claims. US prosecutors reportedly withdrew claims of Maduro leading the so-called “Cartel de los Soles” in their indictment. 

Drug trafficking reports over the years from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) have found Venezuela to play a marginal role in global narcotics trafficking.

China and Russia condemn US violations of international law

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) held an emergency session on Monday to address Washington’s military attacks and kidnapping of Maduro and Flores. The session ultimately produced no resolutions.

Russian UN Ambassador Vasily Nebenzya accused Washington of seeking to return the world to “an era of lawlessness.”

“We cannot allow the United States to proclaim itself as some kind of a supreme judge with the right to invade any country and hand down punishments with no regard for international law,” Nebenzya said.

Chinese representative Fu Cong accused the US of “trampling Venezuela’s sovereignty” and demanded that the Trump administration cease its “bullying and coercive practices.”

Both Moscow and Beijing labeled Maduro’s abduction a violation of the UN Charter and demanded the Venezuelan leader’s release. Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, and several other nations joined the condemnation of the Trump administration’s military operations against Venezuela. 

For his part, Venezuelan UN Ambassador UN Samuel Moncada decried the “illegal and  illegitimate armed attack” against his country that had caused civilian casualties. Unofficial reports have tallied over 80 killed during the January 3 strikes.

In response, US representative Mike Waltz claimed that Washington was not at war with Venezuela and that the military operations constituted a “law enforcement” action.

Delcy Rodríguez sworn in as interim president

Monday likewise saw the Venezuelan National Assembly take office for a new five year term. 277 deputies, elected in the May 2025 elections, were sworn in. Jorge Rodrìguez was once more chosen by his peers to lead the legislative body. During his speech, he emphasized the importance of national unity in the present context.

Rodríguez stated that his main mission is to secure Maduro’s release and return to the South American nation. He likewise pointed out the absence of Cilia Flores, who was also elected to a new term as legislator.

The January 5 session concluded with the swearing in of Vice President Delcy Rodríguez as interim president following a Supreme Court ruling last Saturday.

“This is a historic commitment that I assume with the certainty that national unity and the people’s strength will guarantee our sovereignty,” she said. Rodríguez expressed “pain” over Maduro and Flores’ kidnapping but vowed to “work tirelessly” for peace.

In the wake of the January 3 attacks, US President Donald Trump has issued renewed threats against Caracas, demanding privileged access to oil resources.

In a Sunday cabinet meeting, Rodríguez urged respect for Venezuelan sovereignty and called on the US government to establish an “agenda of cooperation” with Caracas.

Denmark and Mexico, also threatened by US President Donald Trump, warn that the US violated international law.

Members of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), including key US allies, have warned that the abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his wife by US special forces could be a precedent-setting event for international law.

The 15-member bloc met for an emergency meeting on Monday in New York City, where the Venezuelan pair were also due to face drug trafficking charges in a US federal court.

Venezuela’s ambassador to the UN, Samuel Moncada, condemned the US operation as “an illegitimate armed attack lacking any legal justification”, in remarks echoed by Cuba, Colombia and permanent UNSC members Russia and China.

“[The US] imposes the application of its laws outside its own territory and far from its coasts, where it has no jurisdiction, using assaults and the appropriation of assets,” Cuba’s ambassador, Ernesto Soberon Guzman, said, adding that such measures negatively affected Cuba.

Russia’s ambassador, Vassily Nebenzia, said the US cannot “proclaim itself as some kind of a supreme judge, which alone bears the right to invade any country, to label culprits, to hand down and to enforce punishments irrespective of notions of international law, sovereignty and non-intervention”.

Notable critics at the emergency session included traditional US allies, Mexico and Denmark, both of whom Trump has separately threatened with military action over the past year.

Mexico’s ambassador, Hector Vasconcelos, said that the council had an “obligation to act decisively and without double standards” towards the US, and it was for “sovereign peoples to decide their destinies,” according to a UN readout.

His remarks come just days after Trump told reporters that “something will have to be done about Mexico” and its drug cartels, following Maduro’s abduction.

Denmark, a longstanding US security ally, said that “no state should seek to influence political outcomes in Venezuela through the use of threat of force or through other means inconsistent with international law.”

“The inviolability of borders is not up for negotiation,” Denmark’s ambassador, Christina Markus Lassen, told the council in an oblique reference to Trump’s threat that the US would annex Greenland, a self-governed Danish territory.

France, another permanent member of the UNSC, also criticised the US, marking a shift in tone from French President Emmanuel Macron’s initial remarks that Venezuelans “can only rejoice” following Maduro’s abduction.

“The military operation that has led to the capture of Maduro runs counter to the principle of peaceful dispute resolution and runs counter to the principle of non-use of force,” said the French deputy ambassador, Jay Dharmadhikari.

Representatives from Latvia and the United Kingdom, another permanent UNSC member, focused on the conditions in Venezuela created by Maduro’s government.

Latvia’s ambassador, Sanita Pavļuta-Deslandes, said that Maduro’s conditions in Venezuela posed “a grave threat to the security of the region and the world”, citing mass repression, corruption, organised crime and drug trafficking.

The UK ambassador, James Kariuki, said that “Maduro’s claim to power was fraudulent”.

The US ambassador, Mike Waltz, characterised the abduction of Maduro and his wife as a “surgical law enforcement operation facilitated by the US military against two indicted fugitives of American justice”.

The White House defended its wave of air strikes on Venezuela, and in the waters near it, and Maduro’s abduction as necessary to protect US national security, amid unproven claims that Maduro backed “narcoterrorist” drug cartels.

The administration of United States President Donald Trump is planning to meet with executives from US oil companies later this week to discuss boosting Venezuelan oil production after US forces abducted its leader, Nicolas Maduro, the Reuters news agency has reported, citing unnamed sources.

The meetings are crucial to the administration’s hopes of getting top US oil companies back into the South American nation after its government, nearly two decades ago, took control of US-led energy operations there, the Reuters news agency report said on Monday.

The three biggest US oil companies – Exxon Mobil, ConocoPhillips and Chevron – have not yet had any conversations with the Trump administration about Maduro’s ouster, according to four oil industry executives familiar with the matter, contradicting Trump’s statements over the weekend that he had already held meetings with “all” the US oil companies, both before and since Maduro was abducted.

“Nobody in those three companies has had conversations with the White House about operating in Venezuela, pre-removal or post-removal, to this point,” one of the sources said on Monday.

The upcoming meetings will be crucial to the administration’s hopes to boost crude oil production and exports from Venezuela, a former OPEC nation that sits atop the world’s largest reserves, and whose crude oil can be refined by specially designed US refineries. Achieving that goal will require years of work and billions of dollars of investment, analysts say.

It is unclear what executives will be attending the upcoming meetings, and whether oil companies will be attending individually or collectively.

The White House did not comment on the meetings, but said it believed the US oil industry was ready to flood into Venezuela.

“All of our oil companies are ready and willing to make big investments in Venezuela that will rebuild their oil infrastructure, which was destroyed by the illegitimate Maduro regime,” said White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers.

Exxon, Chevron and ConocoPhillips did not immediately respond to requests for comment from Reuters.

One oil industry executive told Reuters the companies would be reluctant to talk about potential Venezuela operations in group settings with the White House, citing antitrust concerns that limit collective discussions among competitors about investment plans, timing and production levels.

Political risks, low oil prices

US forces on Saturday conducted a raid on Venezuela’s capital, arresting Maduro in the dead of night and sending him back to the US to face narcoterrorism charges.

Hours after Maduro’s abduction, Trump said he expects the biggest US oil companies to spend billions of dollars boosting Venezuela’s oil production, after it dropped to about a third of its peak over the past two decades due to underinvestment and sanctions.

But those plans will be hindered by a lack of infrastructure, along with deep uncertainty over the country’s political future, legal framework and long-term US policy, according to industry analysts.

“While the Trump administration has suggested large US oil companies will go into Venezuela and spend billions to fix infrastructure, we believe political and other risks, along with current relatively low oil prices, could prevent this from happening anytime soon,” wrote Neal Dingmann of William Blair in a note.

Material change to Venezuelan production will take a lot of time and millions of dollars of infrastructure improvement, he said.

And any investment in Venezuelan infrastructure right now would take place in a weakened global energy market. Crude prices in the US are down by 20 percent compared with last year. The price for a barrel of benchmark US crude has not been above $70 since June, and has not touched $80 per barrel since June of 2024.

A barrel of oil cost more than $130 in the leadup to the US housing crisis in 2008.

Chevron is the only US major currently operating in Venezuela’s oil fields.

Exxon and ConocoPhillips, meanwhile, had storied histories in the country before their projects were nationalised nearly two decades ago by former Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

Conoco has been seeking billions of dollars in restitution for the takeover of three oil projects in Venezuela under Chavez. Exxon was involved in lengthy arbitration cases against Venezuela after it exited the country in 2007.

Chevron, which exports about 150,000 barrels per day of crude from Venezuela to the US Gulf Coast, meanwhile, has had to carefully manoeuvre with the Trump administration in an effort to maintain its presence in the country in recent years.

A US embargo on Venezuelan oil remained in full effect, Trump has said.

The S&P 500 energy index rose to its highest since March 2025, with heavyweights Exxon Mobil rising by 2.2 percent and Chevron jumping by 5.1 percent.

Venezuelan state TV footage shows Vice President Delcy Rodriguez being formally sworn in as interim president in Caracas days after President Nicolas Maduro was abducted to face narco-terrorism charges in New York.

Caracas, January 5, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuelan social movements and political parties held a massive rally in Caracas on January 4 to reject the US military attacks against the country and the kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro.

The Sunday march took place in the center of the Venezuelan capital and ended close to Miraflores Presidential Palace.

Demonstrators held handmade signs demanding the release and return of Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores, who were abducted in the early hours of January 3 by a US special operations team. US forces bombed several military sites in Caracas and surrounding states.

Venezuelan authorities have yet to report on damages and casualties, with unofficial sources claiming at least 80 people killed.

Venezuelan Vice President Delcy Rodríguez has taken over the presidency on an interim basis after a ruling from the Supreme Court. Following a Sunday cabinet meeting, Rodríguez called on the US to respect the country’s sovereignty and invited Washington to agree to an “agenda of cooperation.”

Photos by Rome Arrieche.

“We are here fulfilling our duties until you return.” The son of abducted Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro delivered a message to his father from the floor of the country’s congress, where he also serves as a lawmaker. He also mentioned his mother, Cilia, who is also in US custody.

For many years before becoming president, Donald Trump publicly criticised the George W Bush administration over its decision to launch the war on Iraq. And yet, today, in his second term as president, he finds himself presiding over a military debacle that is quite reminiscent of Bush’s.

Trump ordered a military intervention to remove an antagonistic foreign leader, based on a flimsy argument of national security, with the goal of accessing that country’s oil. In both cases, we see a naive confidence that the United States can simply achieve its goals through regime change. US intervention into Venezuela reeks of the same hubris that surrounded the Iraq invasion two decades ago.

Yet there are also important differences to consider. The most important distinguishing feature of the operation in Venezuela is its lack of an overarching vision. On Saturday after Trump finished an hour-long news conference alongside his secretaries of defence and state, it was not clear what the plan was for Venezuela going forward, or if there was a plan at all. His statements threatening more attacks in the following days brought no clarity either.

Past instances of US-led regime change fit into the larger ideological visions of the incumbent US commander-in-chief. In 1823, President James Monroe declared the Western Hemisphere off-limits to European colonialism. As the United States spent the 20th century consolidating its sphere of influence across the Americas, the Monroe Doctrine would justify various interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean. The Cold War added new justifications for the United States to overthrow leftist regimes and install friendly governments in the Americas.

As the Cold War ended, President George HW Bush sought to serve as a caretaker for a “new world order” in which the US had emerged as the world’s lone superpower. When Bush sent troops to Somalia in 1992 and his successor Bill Clinton reversed a military coup in Haiti in 1994, they did so under the paradigm of “humanitarian intervention”. When George W Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq, it was done under the umbrella of the post-9/11 “war on terror”. When President Barack Obama intervened against the forces of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, he was guided by the “responsibility to protect” doctrine concerning civilians in danger.

But in the case of the US attack on Venezuela, there has been no ideological justification. Trump and his team have haphazardly thrown around references to humanitarianism, counterterrorism and more to justify the attack. The president even brought up the Monroe Doctrine. But just as it seemed that he was grounding his foreign policy in a larger ideology, albeit one borrowed from two centuries ago, he made a joke of the concept.

“The Monroe Doctrine is a big deal,” Trump explained on Saturday. “But we’ve superseded it by a lot, by a lot. They now call it the Donroe Doctrine.” Trump did not make up this pun; it was used by the New York Post a year ago to describe Trump’s aggressive foreign policy as he threatened to annex Canada, Greenland and the Panama Canal.

The president’s decision to embrace the tongue-in-cheek term illustrates a disturbing reality of his foreign policy: Any notion that he is promoting an ideological vision is a joke.

The truth is Trump is pursuing an increasingly aggressive and militaristic foreign policy in his second term, not because he wants to impose a grand vision, but because he has discovered he can get away with it.

Striking a variety of foreign “bad guys” who have little capacity to fight back – ISIL (ISIS) affiliates in Nigeria who are “persecuting” Christians and “narcoterrorists” in Latin America – appeals to members of Trump’s base.

After he mentioned the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua during Saturday’s news conference, he went on a minutes-long tangent to brag about his military interventions into US cities. While the president’s inability to stay on topic may be concerning for those questioning his health and mental fitness, this digression into domestic affairs had some relevance for his Venezuelan intervention, at least as far as he was concerned: His increasingly militarised war on drugs and crime abroad justifies an increasingly militarised war on drugs and crime at home.

Past presidents have used US power to pursue a wide variety of ideologies and principles. Trump appears to be paying lip service to past ideologies to justify the use of US power. Many times, the “good” intentions of previous  presidents paved the way to hellish outcomes for the peoples who found themselves on the receiving end of US intervention. But those intentions at least created a level of predictability and consistency for the foreign policies of various US administrations.

Trump, by contrast, seems driven solely by immediate political concerns and short-term prospects for glory and profit. If there is a saving grace of such an unprincipled foreign policy, it may be the ephemeral nature of interventions conducted without an overarching vision. An unprincipled approach to military intervention does not foster the kind of ideological commitment that has led other presidents to engage in long-term interventions like the Iraq occupation.

But it also means that Trump could conceivably use military intervention to settle any international dispute or to pursue any ostensibly profitable goal – say assuming control of Greenland from Denmark.

Last year, he decided tariffs were a potent tool for asserting his interests and started applying them almost indiscriminately on allies and adversaries alike. Now that Trump has grown comfortable using the US military to achieve a range of goals – profit, gunboat diplomacy, distraction from domestic scandals, etc – the danger is that he will grow similarly haphazard in his use of force.

That does not bode well for the US nor for the rest of the world. At a time when multiple global crises are overlapping – climate, conflict and impoverishment – the last thing the world needs is a trigger-happy superpower without a clear strategy or a day-after plan.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Jan. 5 (UPI) — U.S. President Donald Trump issued a warning to Venezuela’s new president, Delcy Rodriguez, to “do what’s right,” or face a similar or worse fate than President Nicolas Maduro, who is in a U.S. prison after being seized by U.S. Special Forces over the weekend.

“If she doesn’t do what’s right, she is going to pay a very big price, probably bigger than Maduro,” Trump told The Atlantic, adding that regime change remained on the table, saying that it was preferable to the present state of affairs and the situation “can’t get any worse.”

Rodriguez, who was due to be sworn in as president in Caracas at 7 a.m. EST with the support of the country’s military and the supreme court, has said she is willing to cooperate with the United States after initially condemning the arrest of Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, and demanding their release.

“We invite the U.S. government to collaborate with us on an agenda of cooperation orientated towards shared development within the framework of international law,” she told her cabinet at her first meeting in charge on Sunday.

Trump said U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio had spoken with Rodriguez and that she was “essentially willing to do what we think is necessary to make Venezuela great again.”

Amid conflicting messaging, it was unclear if that was Trump’s meaning when he said in his news conference Saturday announcing the military operation that the United States was “going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition.”

“We’re going to be running it with a group, and we’re going to make sure it’s run properly,” Trump said.

Rubio clarified Sunday that Trump was talking about exerting control from outside the country to bring about major policy shifts.

He said sanctions were one of the tools at the administration’s disposal to ensure the cooperation of the acting leadership, saying in an American broadcast TV interview that a blockade on Venezuela’s oil exports, being enforced by the U.S. military, would remain in place.

“We continue with that quarantine and we expect to see that there will be changes not just in the way the oil industry is run for the benefit of the people, but also so that they stop the drug trafficking, so that we no longer have these gang problems, so that they kick the [Columbian insurgent groups] FARC and the ELN out, and that they no longer cozy up to Hizballah and Iran in our own hemisphere,” Rubio said.

Meanwhile, Maduro was due to make his first appearance in Federal Court in New York later Monday, where he and Flores will be read a 25-page indictment accusing the pair of accumulating vast wealth from a narco-terrorism conspiracy.

They also face three related charges of cocaine importation conspiracy, possession of machine guns and destructive devices, and conspiracy to possess machine guns and destructive devices.

They are due to be transferred from the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, which houses defendants accused of regular crimes, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in White Plains, N.Y., to appear at 12 p.m. EST.

Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro is to appear in a New York court on Monday, two days after he was abducted by US special forces in a military operation in Caracas.

The US military arrested Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, on Saturday and brought them to New York, where they face multiple federal charges, including drugs and weapons charges.

Here is more about Maduro’s scheduled court appearance:

When and where will it take place?

Maduro is to appear before a federal judge at noon (17:00 GMT).

The appearance is scheduled to happen in the Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse in the Southern District of New York. Maduro is to appear before US District Judge Alvin Hellerstein.

A court spokesperson told NBC News that Flores, who is also listed as a defendant in a US indictment unsealed on Saturday, will appear in court on Monday as well.

What are the charges?

According to the indictment, the US accuses Maduro of being at the forefront of corruption to “use his illegally obtained authority” to “transport thousands of tons of cocaine” to the US with his coconspirators.

Additionally, the indictment alleges that Maduro has “tarnished” every public office he has held. It adds that Maduro “allows cocaine-fueled corruption to flourish for his own benefit, for the benefit of members of his ruling regime, and for the benefit of his family members”.

Maduro faces four counts:

• Count 1, narcoterrorism conspiracy: US prosecutors say Maduro and his coconspirators knowingly provided something of financial value to US-designated “foreign terrorist organizations” and their members. The indictment lists these organisations as the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), a leftist rebel group that signed a peace deal in 2016 but has dissidents who refused to lay down their arms and are still involved in the drug trade; Segunda Marquetalia, the largest dissident FARC group; National Liberation Army, another leftist Colombian rebel group; Mexico’s Sinaloa Cartel; Los Zetas/Cartel del Noreste, another Mexican drug cartel; and Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang.
• Count 2, cocaine importation conspiracy: It accuses Maduro and his codefendants of conspiring to manufacture, distribute and import cocaine into the US.
• Count 3, possession of machineguns and destructive devices: The indictment accuses the defendants of possessing, carrying and using machineguns in relation to the above drug‑trafficking counts.
• Count 4, conspiracy to possess machineguns and destructive devices: It further accuses the defendants of conspiring to use, carry and possess those weapons in furtherance of drug trafficking.

The indictment also says Maduro and his codefendants should forfeit to the US government any proceeds and assets obtained from the alleged crimes.

Is there evidence for these charges?

There is little evidence that drugs are trafficked from Venezuela on a large scale. The 2023 United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime World Drug Report said global cocaine production hit a record of 3,708 tonnes, up nearly one‑third from 2022, with most coca cultivation taking place in Colombia, followed by Peru and Bolivia.

Trafficking routes into the US in 2023-2024 primarily passed through Colombia, Peru and Ecuador, not Venezuela, although it does serve as a minor transit corridor for Colombian cocaine moving into the eastern Caribbean.

Who is named in the indictment?

Maduro

Maduro, 63, who became Venezuela’s president in 2013, was declared the winner of 2024’s election. His re-election was rejected as fraudulent by the US and independent observers, such as the Carter Center. A UN expert panel said the 2024 vote failed to meet international standards.

Nine Latin American countries called for a review of the results with independent oversight.

Maduro defended the election results and accused his opponents of undermining the country’s sovereignty.

Since returning to the White House nearly a year ago, US President Donald Trump has expanded sanctions and punitive measures against Maduro and senior officials in his government.

The Trump administration ramped up military pressure starting in August when it deployed warships and thousand of its service members in the Caribbean near Venezuela. It has since carried out dozens of air strikes on alleged Venezuelan drug boats, killing more than 100 people.

Maduro has pushed back by mobilising Venezuelan military personnel.

During this time, the Caracas-based news network Globovision quoted Maduro as saying: “From the north, the empire has gone mad and, like a rotten rehash, has renewed its threats to the peace and stability of Venezuela.”

But a day before Saturday’s US attack on the country, Maduro had offered to hold talks to combat drug trafficking.

Flores

Flores, 69, has been married to Maduro since 2013.

Known as the “first combatant” rather than first lady, Flores is a veteran lawyer and politician who rose to prominence by defending future President Hugo Chavez after his failed 1992 coup. She helped secure his release and later became a key Chavismo figure and the first woman to preside over Venezuela’s National Assembly. Chavismo, which promotes socialism and anti-imperialist politics, is the political movement started by Chavez, Maduro’s mentor.

The indictment accuses Flores of joining Maduro’s cocaine importation conspiracy.

Other defendants

The indictment names four other people as Maduro’s coconspirators, namely Diosdado Cabello, Venezuela’s interior minister; Ramon Rodriguez Chacin, former Venezuelan interior minister; Nicolas Maduro Guerra, Maduro’s son and a Venezuelan politician; and Hector Rusthenford Guerrero Flores, the leader of Tren de Aragua, which was designated as a “foreign terrorist organization” by the US in February. But most experts do not define Tren de Aragua as a “terrorist organisation”.

It is not clear yet who will represent Maduro, Flores and the other defendants.

Who is the judge?

Hellerstein was born in 1933 in New York. He was appointed to the federal bench in 1998 by former President Bill Clinton.

He is likely on Monday to advise Maduro and Flores about their rights and ask them if they want to enter a plea.

What’s at stake?

Maduro’s freedom is primarily at stake. If convicted, he could face 30 years to life in prison.

“This is less about Maduro as it is about access to Venezuela’s oil deposits,” Ilias Bantekas, a professor of transnational law at Hamad Bin Khalifa University in Qatar, told Al Jazeera. “This is the number one target. Trump is not content with just allowing US oil firms to get concessions but to ‘run’ the country, which entails absolute and indefinite control over Venezuela’s resources.”

Venezuela’s oil reserves are concentrated primarily in the Orinoco Belt, a region in the eastern part of the country stretching across roughly 55,000sq km (21,235sq miles).

While the country is home to the world’s largest proven oil reserves – at an estimated 303 billion barrels as of 2023 – it earns only a fraction of the revenue it once did from exporting crude due to mismanagement and US sanctions.

Last month, Trump accused Venezuela in a post on his Truth Social platform of “stealing” US oil, land and other assets and using that oil to fund crime, “terrorism” and human trafficking.

Trump repeated his false claims after Maduro’s arrest. During a news conference on Saturday, Trump said the US would “run” Venezuela until a “safe, proper and judicious transition” could be carried out.

“Given the opposition of all South American states, save for Argentina, to US dominance in the region, Trump’s plan requires a vast military deployment. We need to see how countries like Brazil and Colombia react to this, including also BRICS,” said Bantekas from Hamad Bin Khalifa University.

In a joint statement released on Sunday, the governments of Spain, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Uruguay said the US actions in Venezuela “constitute an extremely dangerous precedent for peace and regional security and endanger the civilian population”.

Was Maduro’s abduction legal?

This case is unusual because there are questions about how Maduro was captured and whether it was legal. Russia, China and other Venezuelan allies have accused the US of violating international law.

“If there was an armed conflict between Venezuela and the USA and, given that Maduro is the head of his country’s armed forces, then he would be a legitimate target,” Bantekas said.

“However, under the circumstances there is no armed conflict between the two countries and in the absence of an armed attack by Venezuela against the US, the latter’s invasion in Venezuela violates article 2(4) of the UN Charter, as does the abduction of the country’s President. It is a blatant act of aggression.”

Article 2(4) of the UN Charter bars UN members from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.

A United Nations Security Council meeting on Monday will determine the legality of the US abduction of Maduro.

“Given that Maduro is already in US custody and in the USA, it is in the interests of all parties that he appear before a court. At the very least, Maduro can challenge the legality of his arrest and the jurisdiction of the court,” Bantekas said.

“The court itself has an obligation to decide if it has jurisdiction and as a preliminary issue decide whether Maduro enjoys immunity from criminal prosecution. If these issues are dispensed the court nonetheless finds that it has jurisdiction and that Maduro does not enjoy immunity, then the prosecutor must prove its case.”

What’s next?

The Trump administration has not explicitly stated a clear plan for Venezuela, with analysts saying the administration has sent out confusing signals.

In an interview with the NBC news channels on Sunday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio suggested that Washington will not govern Venezuela on a day-to-day basis besides enforcing an existing “oil quarantine”.

Rubio told ABC news on Sunday that the US had leverage over Venezuela and the US would “set the conditions” to ensure that Venezuela is no longer a “narco-trafficking paradise”.

But on Sunday, Trump told reporters that the US is ready to carry out a second military strike on Venezuela if its government refuses to cooperate with his plan to ‘resolve’ the situation there.

She could “pay a very big price” if she “does not do what’s right”, Trump said, refering Venezuela’s new leader, Delcy Rodriguez.

During his Saturday conference, Trump said that Rodriguez told Rubio that she will do what the US needs her to. “She really doesn’t have a choice,” Trump had said.

In his first press conference after Maduro’s illegal abduction on Saturday, Trump ruled out the possibility of working with opposition leader and Nobel Prize winner Maria Corina Machado, who was barred from running in the 2024 presidential elections.

Machado, a member of the Venezuelan National Assembly, is seen as the most credible adversary of Maduro’s leftist government.

On Monday, Rodriguez, the interim leader, offered to cooperate with Trump. In a statement posted on social media, she invited Trump to “collaborate” and sought “respectful relations”.

“President Donald Trump, our peoples and our region deserve peace and dialogue, not war,” she wrote.

Her conciliatory tone came a day after she appeared on state TV declaring that Maduro was still Venezuela’s sole legitimate president.

United States President Donald Trump has promised to “take back” Venezuela’s oil reserves and unleash them onto the global market after abducting Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.

But exploiting the Latin American country’s vast reserves would face a host of big hurdles, from decrepit infrastructure and legal obstacles to leadership uncertainty in Caracas and an excess supply of oil in the global market, experts say.

Venezuela possesses the world’s largest known oil reserves – estimated to be some 303 billion barrels – but currently produces only a tiny fraction of global output. Its estimated output was 860,000 barrels per day (bpd) in November, less than 1 percent of the world’s total, compared with 3.7 million bpd during peak production in 1970.

The oil sector’s decline has been blamed on the combined effects of US sanctions and years of underinvestment, mismanagement and corruption under Maduro and his left-wing predecessor, Hugo Chavez.

While the Trump administration could boost supply in the short term by lifting sanctions, restoring Venezuela’s output to anything near peak levels would require huge investment and likely take years, according to energy analysts.

‘Venezuela’s oil infrastructure is in poor shape’

Oil prices moved only slightly in trading on Monday amid market expectations that output would remain largely unchanged for the foreseeable future.

“Venezuela’s oil infrastructure is in poor shape overall, due to lack of maintenance for both equipment and oilfield wells,” Scott Montgomery, a global energy expert at the University of Washington, told Al Jazeera.

“The state oil company, PDVSA, is well known to suffer from corruption and lack of expertise – many well-trained people have left the country to work elsewhere – and has been unable to invest in the country’s petroleum sector,” Montgomery added.

Thomas O’Donnell, an energy and geopolitical analyst based in Berlin, Germany, estimated that Venezuela could return to peak production in five to seven years in the “absolute best” circumstances, including a peaceful transfer of power.

“Longer term, if things are sorted out, yes, Venezuela can become one of the world’s biggest producers of oil. As far as how long that takes, that has all to do with the transition and what is put in place to manage that – both the country’s security and also to manage the investments,” O’Donnell told Al Jazeera.

Mixed messaging from Trump administration

Trump’s administration has provided conflicting messages on Washington’s exact plans for Venezuela and its oil reserves.

On Saturday, Trump said the US would “run” Venezuela and that US oil companies were ready to invest billions of dollars to build up the country’s dilapidated infrastructure and “get the oil flowing”.

In interviews with US media on Sunday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio sought to downplay Trump’s remarks about controlling the country, saying the president was referring to “running policy” and his plans related to spurring private investment, “not securing the oilfields”.

Trump later on Sunday said Washington was “in charge” of the country and was “dealing with” members of the acting administration without providing details.

Under international law, the US has no claim of ownership over Venezuela’s oil reserves, as sovereign states possess the right to control and use their natural resources under the United Nations-endorsed Principle of Permanent Sovereignty over Natural Resources.

Foreign investors, however, can claim compensation when authorities seize their assets.

ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips were awarded $1.6bn and $8.7bn, respectively, in international arbitration following the Chavez government’s 2007 nationalisation of the oil sector. Caracas did not pay out in either case.

US oil giants, including Chevron, ExxonMobil, and ConocoPhillips, have not commented directly on Trump’s claims about planned investments in Venezuela.

Chevron is the only large US oil company currently operating in Venezuela, the result of an exemption to US sanctions first granted by the administration of former President Joe Biden.

Consultancy Rystad Energy, based in Oslo, Norway, has estimated that Venezuela’s oil sector would need about $110bn in capital investment to return to its mid-2010s output of about 2 million bpd.

Patrick De Haan, an analyst at energy price tracker GasBuddy, said companies may be reluctant to commit to large investments in the country when global oil prices are hovering around $60 a barrel due to a glut of supply.

“It will take a longer amount of time than many likely realise. Oil companies in a low-priced environment of today would likely be cautious investing billions with oil prices already low,” De Haan told Al Jazeera.

“In addition, Trump seizing Maduro could lead to loyalists sabotaging efforts to increase output. A lot would have to go right to yield the most optimistic timelines.”

US companies are likely to carefully weigh political developments in Venezuela following their experiences with the Chavez government’s expropriation of their assets.

“Oil companies are not likely to rush into a situation where the state is in turmoil, security is lacking, and no clear path forward for political stability exists,” the University of Washington’s Montgomery said.

Maduro due in court in New York

Interim President Delcy Rodriguez, who was Maduro’s deputy, is now leading the country following a ruling by Venezuela’s Supreme Court.

Maduro is scheduled to appear in a New York court on Monday to face charges related to alleged drug trafficking and working with criminal gangs.

Venezuela’s government has condemned the Trump administration over Saturday’s bombing and overthrow of Maduro, labelling his capture a “cowardly kidnapping”.

Russia, China, Iran and Brazil, among other countries, have accused Washington of violating international law, while nations including Israel, Argentina and Greece have welcomed Maduro’s forced removal.

OPEC, which sets limits on production for its 12 members, including Venezuela, is another factor in the Latin American country’s potential oil output.

“Venezuela is a member of OPEC, and like many countries, may become more actively subject to quotas if output climbs,” De Haan said.

Phil Flynn, a market analyst at the Price Futures Group, said reviving Venezuela’s oil production would face “significant challenges”, but he was more bullish about the near-term prospects than other analysts.

He said the market could conceivably see a couple of hundred thousand more barrels a day coming online in the coming months.

“We’ve not had a free Venezuela, and sometimes the US energy industry has the capability to do a lot more than people give them credit for,” Flynn told Al Jazeera.

Following overnight U.S. airstrikes on Caracas, the seizure of President Nicolás Maduro, and President Donald Trump’s declaration that Washington will take control of Venezuela’s oil and effectively run the country, analysts Steve Ellner and Ricardo Vaz warn that the operation constitutes an unlawful use of force.

They cite the combination of military assault, extraterritorial abduction, resource seizure, and alleged extrajudicial killings at sea as violations of international law and Venezuelan sovereignty.

Venezuela’s interim president Delcy Rodriguez met with the country’s cabinet of ministers following the abduction of Nicolas Maduro. She has expressed willingness to work with the US, while Donald Trump warned of serious consequences if she fails to cooperate.

It was his 26th birthday, so Wilmer Castro was not surprised by the flurry of messages that lit up his phone.

However, as he began scrolling on Saturday morning, he realised the messages were not birthday wishes, but news of something he had long hoped for: Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro had been removed from power.

“I think it is the best gift that I will ever receive, one I will never forget,” the university student said from Ejido.

Castro told Al Jazeera that he was so elated by the news that he began daydreaming about his future self recounting the story of Maduro’s fall to his grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

“I will tell them that on January 3, 2026, a dictator fell, and [that moment] is going to be very beautiful.”

The abduction of Venezuela’s long-time authoritarian leader – and his wife – by the United States followed months of escalating tensions between the two countries, including US strikes on alleged drug-trafficking vessels and the deployment of US ships near Venezuela’s coastal waters.

But by Sunday morning, Castro’s initial jubilation was clouded by a heavy quiet. The weight of uncertainty brought the city to a sombre pause, one that closed in on him and felt unlike anything he had experienced before.

“It’s like being in a field with nothing else around. It’s a mournful silence; I can’t describe it,” he said.

That uncertainty was felt by many Venezuelans on Sunday morning.

Venezuela has had a socialist government since 1999, first under President Hugo Chavez and later Maduro, a period that began with oil-funded social programmes but unravelled into economic mismanagement, corruption and repression – with international sanctions further squeezing the population.

Momentum around the 2024 presidential election raised hopes that the opposition alliance would take control. But when Maduro declared victory, despite opposition claims of a landslide win for Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia, a crackdown on dissent followed. It left many Venezuelans concluding that any real transition might depend on pressure — or even intervention — from outside the country.

‘Deathly silence’

In southeastern Caracas on Saturday, 54-year-old Edward Ocariz was jolted awake by a loud crash and the vibrating windows of his home near the Fort Tiuna military barracks. He thought it was an earthquake, but when he looked outside, he saw unfamiliar helicopters flying low above smoke rising in the city.

“The noise kept coming,” he said. “I could immediately tell the helicopters were not Venezuelan because I had never seen them here.”

Then, just as suddenly as it had started, it stopped.

“There was a deathly silence,” Ocariz said, adding that the brief suspension of mobile phone services and power outages contributed to the silence. “We were waiting to understand what was happening.”

Fear accompanied the fragments of information that did manage to seep through, Ocariz said. “But it was a fear mixed with joy – tremendous joy. It’s hard to explain.”

On Sunday, when images of a blindfolded and handcuffed Maduro began circulating, Ocariz reflected on the suffering he had endured under the president’s regime.

The human rights activist said he was wrongfully charged with “terrorism” and spent nearly five months as a political prisoner in Tocuyito prison, a maximum-security facility in Carabobo state.

Under Maduro, the country had a long history of jailing those who dissent. After the disputed 2024 election, nearly 2,500 protesters, human rights activists, journalists and opposition figures were arrested. While some were later released, others remain behind bars.

“I felt satisfied. A process of justice is finally beginning,” Ocariz said, fully aware that Maduro will not have to endure the dire prison conditions he did, or be denied food and legal representation.

Despite the joy he and other Venezuelans now feel, Ocariz warns that much remains to be done.

“The population still feels a huge amount of fear [from the authorities] — psychological fear — because it’s well known how the police and justice system use their power to criminalise whoever they choose.”

So far, key institutions remain in the hands of figures from Nicolas Maduro’s inner circle, including Vice President Delcy Rodriguez, who has been named acting president.

But for many Venezuelans — including Castro and Ocariz — seeing a senior Chavista figure still in power is unsettling, particularly as the Trump administration continues to engage with her.

“It is certainly frustrating for me. However, I understand that Venezuela needs to continue with its administrative, functional, and operational management as a country, as a nation,” Ocariz said, adding that the US must maintain some order to control the power vacuum and stamp out repression.

Economic concerns

Venezuela remains heavily militarised, and fears of further unrest linger. During periods of dissent, the authorities relied not only on formal security forces but also on “colectivos”, armed civilian groups accused by rights organisations of intimidation and violence.

Jose Chalhoub, an energy and political risk analyst at Jose Parejo & Associates in Caracas, said he is concerned about the possibility of more attacks and social unrest.

“Any potential new government that will move ahead with the cleansing of the top ranks of the armed forces and security and police forces will lead to the disarmament of the colectivos,” he said, adding that fixing the lingering economic crisis should also be one of the main priorities.

“A new government that applies quick economic measures leading to a recovery will outshine the ideological legacy of the Bolivarian revolution,” he said, referring to the ideology of Chavismo, defined by anti-imperialism, patriotism and socialism.

Those loyal to Maduro have long blamed Venezuela’s economic woes on the US — namely, the sanctions it imposed on the oil sector.

Chalhoub said he believed Trump’s promise to boost the country’s oil production could help the economy, though he found the US president’s assertion that the US will “run the country” baffling.

However, not everyone is happy with the Trump administration’s attack.

Alex Rajoy, a mototaxi driver in Caracas, said the US president was on an imperialist crusade with the goal of “robbing” Venezuela of its natural resources.

Despite his anger, Rajoy said he will stay home over the coming days because he is fearful of further attacks.

“These missiles aren’t aimed only at Chavistas,” he said, referring to those loyal to Venezuela’s socialist ideology.

“They threaten opposition people, too,” he said, adding that anyone supporting foreign intervention amounts to a betrayal. “It’s treason against the homeland,” he said.

What now?

For Castro, the university student, the elation he felt on Saturday has been interrupted by fear for his immediate needs – concerns over whether stores would remain open in Ejido and rising costs. Under Maduro, he has long struggled to afford basic items.

“People in the street were going crazy yesterday,” he said. “Everyone was buying food with half of what they had in their bank accounts, buying what they could, because we don’t know what the future holds.”

The scenes brought back memories of the shortages of 2016, when hyperinflation and scarcity plunged the country into crisis, forcing people to queue for hours and rush between shops with limits on how much each person could buy.

But a day after the attack, Castro said Venezuelans are reflecting on the future of their country and the uncertainty of that future.

“There’s happiness, there’s fear, there’s gratitude, there’s the ‘what will happen next?’” he said. “For my next birthday, I want total freedom for Venezuela – and hopefully, God willing, we will have it.”

Caracas, January 4, 2025 (venezuelanalysis.com) – The governments of Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Uruguay, and Spain issued a joint statement Sunday rejecting “unilateral US actions in Venezuelan territory.”

“These actions contravene basic principles of international law and represent a very dangerous precedent for peace and regional security,” the communique read.

The joint statement followed widespread regional and global condemnation of Washington’s January 3 strikes against Venezuelan military sites and kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores.

The countries went on to issue calls for dialogue and urged the United Nations secretary general and member states to help “de-escalate tensions and preserve peace.” 

In response to US President Donald Trump’s claim that he would “run” Venezuela, the signatories expressed concern over “attempts at foreign government control or seizure of natural resources.” However, the declaration made no mention of Maduro nor called for his release.

The diplomatic response to the US attacks also included an emergency summit of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean nations (CELAC), held on Sunday, January 4. Venezuelan Foreign Minister Yván Gil decried the US actions as blatant violations of international law and the United Nations Charter.

“The US has violated the personal immunity of a sitting head of state,” Gil told regional leaders in the conference call. “Kidnapping a president is kidnapping a people’s sovereignty.”

Venezuela’s top diplomat urged CELAC member-states to “take a step forward,” warning that silence would amount to acceptance of Washington’s unilateral acts.

A number of countries, including Venezuelan allies Russia and China, have forcefully denounced the US military operation. In a Sunday statement, Beijing charged Washington with a “clear violation of international law” and called for Maduro and Flores’ “immediate release.”

The UN Security Council is scheduled to hold an emergency session on Monday.

For her part, Venezuela Vice President and now acting Interim President Delcy Rodríguez reiterated demands for Maduro’s release and vowed that the country would not submit “to any empire.” Rodríguez held a press conference Saturday afternoon and confirmed the enactment of a decree establishing a “state of external commotion.” The instrument grants the executive additional tools, including the ability to mobilize troops or restrict civil liberties, for a period of 90 days that can be extended.

On Saturday night, the Venezuelan Supreme Court ruled that Maduro’s kidnapping and rendition to US soil constituted a temporary absence and that Rodríguez was mandated to take over the presidency on an interim basis.

Footage surfaced Saturday evening showing Maduro being walked out of an airplane in New York. He was later taken to a DEA facility before being moved, along with Flores, to the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn. He made no statements but greeted DEA officers and appeared upbeat in photos, making a peace sign and holding his thumbs up.

The Venezuelan president was indicted by a New York district court on Saturday, with charges including “narcoterrorism conspiracy” and “possession of machine guns.” A hearing is reportedly scheduled for Monday.

For their part, Venezuela’s National BolivarianArmed Forces (FANB) likewise issued a communique on Sunday, rejecting the “cowardly kidnapping” of Maduro and Flores and reiterating its mission to “confront imperial aggression.”

The FANB voiced support for Rodríguez taking over the presidency on an acting basis and vowed to maintain readiness to preserve “peace and internal order.” 

The Defense Ministry has yet to provide a report on damages and casualties from the US strikes, though Sunday’s communiqué condemned the “cold-blooded murder” of members of Maduro’s security detail. Unconfirmed reports have put forward a figure of 80 deaths.

Venezuelan popular movements and political parties took to the streets for a second consecutive day on Sunday, holding marches and rallies in Caracas and other cities. Public transportation and retail functioned to a greater degree than on Saturday.

The US attacks also spurred numerous international solidarity demonstrations over the weekend. Crowds gathered in dozens of Latin American, European and US cities. A demonstration was called for Sunday outside the Brooklyn detention center where Maduro is being held.

The January 3 operation came on the heels of the largest ever US Caribbean military build-up, with Trump having previously ordered dozebs of strikes against small boats accused of carrying drugs, killing over 100 civilians. The US president has repeatedly expressed intentions of using military threats to extract favorable oil deals for US corporations.

In a Sunday interview, Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned the acting government in Caracas to “make the right decisions” and affirmed that the US retained “leverage” mechanisms, including a naval blockade stopping oil exports.

Jan. 4 (UPI) — The International Bar Association on Sunday expressed concerns over the United States military intervention in Venezuela, stating it “raises serious questions under international law.”

The United States removed Venezuela’s authoritarian president, Nicolas Maduro, and arrested his wife on Saturday in a clandestine military operation following months of speculation amid a U.S. military build in the region.

The Trump administration has framed its military action as a law enforcement operation as Maduro was indicted in the United States on narco-terrorism and drug conspiracy charges in 2020.

While Maduro’s claim to the presidency has been challenged for years following widely disregarded elections, his arrest in Venezuela by the United States has drawn allegations, including from ally France, that his detainment is illegal under international law.

In a statement emailed to UPI on Sunday night, the International Bar Association, the world’s largest association of lawyers, said it “expresses concern” over the U.S. military action in the South American country, while citing the United Nations Charter, which prohibits intervention in matters within domestic jurisdiction, the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.

“Measures or policies aimed at coercing political change in another state, when undertaken outside internationally recognized legal frameworks, are inconsistent with these obligations and risk normalizing conduct that international law was designed to prevent,” the IBA said.

“Even in the face of ongoing reprehensible conduct by state leaders, adherence to international law remains essential to preserving the integrity of the rules-based international order.”

Maduro is a long-time foe of U.S. President Donald Trump, who tried to oust the South American leader during his first term.

During his reign as Venezuela’s leader, Maduro has been accused of committing human rights violations against his own people, millions of whom have left the country over the last decade.

The IBA said it is aware of the allegations and conduct of Maduro’s regime that have led to widespread suffering and that they warrant “robust scrutiny and accountability both under domestic and international law, pursued through lawful mechanisms, including international or independent domestic judicial processes.”

“The IBA encourages a democratic transition in Venezuela that respects the rule of law,” it said.

Jan. 4 (UPI) — Former New York City cop, U.S. Secret Service agent and conservative media personality Dan Bongino has exited his post as deputy director after less than a year in the office.

“It was a busy last day on the job. This will be my last post on this account. Tomorrow I return to civilian life,” Bongino, 51, posted on X Saturday.

“It’s been an incredible year thanks to the leadership and decisiveness of President [Donald] Trump. It was the honor of a lifetime to work with Director [Kash] Patel, and to serve you, the American people. See you on the other side.”

On Bongino’s last shift Saturday, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his wife Cilia were captured by U.S. special forces and FBI agents, and flown to New York where they are to be arraigned on weapons and drug charges on Monday.

“Dan heads back to the private sector after helping orchestrate a record year for the @fbi,” Patel wrote on X Sunday.

“-Historic 20% drop in nationwide murder rate-100% increase in arrests year to year -1,800 gangs and criminal enterprises disrupted (210% increase)-2,000+ kilos of Fentanyl seized (up 31%) enough to kill 130 million Americans-Nihilistic Violent Extremism arrests up 490%-Over 6,000 child victims located (up 22%),” Patel continued.

“-Espionage arrests up 35%-Multiple successful surges including Summer Heat which had almost 9,000 arrests in just three months This FBI is saving lives, protecting innocent kids, and taking deadly drugs off our streets at levels not seen in decades. None of it would’ve been possible without Dan’s leadership and support. And he paved the way for even better things to come. Thank you @dbongino.”

Bongino replied to Patel, stating: “Thank you my friend, it was an honor to serve with you. You’re doing an incredible job and I KNOW you’re focused, resolute, and over the target. We got a lot done in a year and there’s a lot more coming.”

Bongino announced last month that he was planning to leave.

At the time, Trump told reporters Bongino had done a “great job,” but wants to “get back to his show.”

CNN said Bongino exited because he frequently clashed with Attorney General Pam Bondi and because the job was taking a toll on his personal life.

Fox News said Andrew Bailey is now the only deputy director at the FBI.

Venezuela’s Defence Minister Vladimir Padrino Lopez has denounced the United States’ move to abduct leader Nicolas Maduro as a “cowardly kidnapping”, adding that some of the president’s bodyguards were killed “in cold blood”, as well as military personnel and civilians on the Venezuelan side.

In his televised statement on Sunday, Padrino Lopez also endorsed a Supreme Court ruling that appointed Vice President Delcy Rodriguez — who also serves as oil minister — as acting president for 90 days.

US President Donald Trump threatened that Rodriguez will pay a “very big price” if she doesn’t cooperate with Washington. “If she doesn’t do what’s right, she is going to pay a very big price, probably bigger than Maduro,” Trump told The Atlantic in a telephone interview.

US forces attacked Caracas in the early hours of Saturday, bombing military targets and spiriting away Maduro and his wife to face federal narco-trafficking charges in New York. The Venezuelan president was escorted off a plane at Stewart Air National Guard Base in New York state and taken to a Brooklyn jail.

He is due to make his first appearance on Monday in Manhattan’s federal court.

US to use oil blockade to leverage change in Venezuela

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Sunday suggested that Washington would not take a day-to-day role in governing Venezuela other than enforcing an existing “oil quarantine”, using that leverage to press policy changes in the country.

Rubio’s statements seemed designed to temper concerns, a day after Trump announced the US would “run” the oil-rich nation. The Trump administration’s actions drew unease from parts of his own Republican Party coalition, including an “America First” base that is opposed to foreign interventions, as well as from observers who recalled past nation-building efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Rubio dismissed such criticism, saying that Trump’s intent had been misunderstood by a “foreign policy establishment” that was fixated on the Middle East.

Al Jazeera’s Phil Lavelle, reporting from Doral, Florida in the US, said Trump had been elected on an “America First” policy centred around no engagement in foreign wars or sending US service personnel into danger.

“Now we’ve got this situation where he said, less than 24 hours ago, ‘We’re not afraid of putting boots on the ground,’” Lavelle said.

Protests took place in cities across the US against Trump’s military action in Venezuela. Hundreds gathered in the rain in downtown Los Angeles, carrying signs saying “Stop bombing Venezuela now!” and “No blood for oil”.

“I stand against US imperialism altogether. They want oil … They want to help the corporate billionaires. Bombing is just their means to building power like that, of taking control. So again, I’m against it,” said one protester named Niven.

Trump on Saturday delivered a speech in which he made little mention of the so-called “war on drugs” – which for months had been his main justification for bombing Venezuelan ship and assets – but argued that Venezuela had “stolen” oil from the US and that it would now be taken back.

The United Nations special rapporteur on human rights and counterterrorism, Ben Saul, said the US actions in Venezuela were illegal, calling on Trump to be investigated and impeached. “Every Venezuelan life lost is a violation of the right to life. President Trump should be impeached and investigated for the alleged killings,” he said in a social media post.

The UN Security Council (UNSC) was set to meet on Monday to discuss the situation in Venezuela. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said he was “deeply alarmed” by the US strikes, which a spokesperson said could “constitute a dangerous precedent”.

Uncertainty in Venezuela after Maduro’s abduction

Some Venezuelans in Caracas have welcomed the US’s seizure of Maduro, but others said the action could worsen conflict in the country, with protests denouncing the US taking place.

“There should be a positive change for all Venezuelans, because it has been 28 years of government, and now is the time for transition in this country,” said Ronald Gaulee, a motorcycle rider in Caracas.

Merchant Juan Carlos Rincon was more cautious. “The truth is that there is a lot of manipulation behind all this,” he told the Reuters news agency. “We want to be at peace, move forward, and for Venezuela to have, like any other country, the right to choose its own destiny and its own leaders.”

Baker Franklin Jimenez said he would heed the government’s call to defend the country. “If they took him away, I think they shouldn’t have done so, because this will create an even worse conflict than the one we have now,” he said. “And as for the bombings and all that, we have to go out, we all have to go out into the streets to defend our homeland, to defend ourselves.”

Some Venezuelans decided to flee the country amid the uncertainty, crossing the Venezuela-Colombia border to reach the Colombian town of Cucuta. Karina Rey described a “tense situation” in the Venezuelan city of San Cristobal, just across the border.

“There are long lines, and people are very paranoid, or on edge, over food. Supermarkets are closing,” Rey told Al Jazeera. “The lines are very long just to stock up on food, because we don’t know what will happen in the coming weeks. We’re waiting to see what happens.”

Al Jazeera’s Alessandro Rampietti, reporting from Cucuta, said many Venezuelans there initially felt jubilant after Maduro was ousted. “But that quickly shifted to uncertainty,” he said.

“Several people said they expected the United States to immediately bring opposition leader Maria Corina Machado back into the country, along with Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia, who many Venezuelans believe won the last presidential election,” Rampietti continued.

“Instead, with much of the existing leadership still in place and with Vice President Delcy Rodriguez appointed as interim leader, there is growing fear about what could happen next.”

Tiziano Breda, a senior analyst at the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project, said what happens next hinges on the response of Venezuela’s government and armed forces.

“So far, they’ve avoided direct confrontation with US forces, but deployments on the streets point to efforts to contain unrest,” he said. “A smooth transition remains unlikely, and the risk of resistance from pro-regime armed groups – including elements within the military and Colombian rebel networks active in the country – remains high.”

The United States’ abduction of Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro has been sharply criticised by his allies – but not by Western nations, despite questions about its legality.

So, does the operation signal a new aggressive US strategy? And what might the global impact be?

Presenter: Adrian Finighan

Guests:

Charles Shapiro – Former US ambassador to Venezuela under President George W Bush

Stefan Wolff – Professor of International Security at the University of Birmingham in the United Kingdom

Ernesto Castaneda – Director of the Center for Latin American and Latino Studies at the American University in Washington, DC

Jan. 4 (UPI) — President Donald Trump said in an interview published Sunday that the United States needs to annex Greenland “for defense,” while his deputy chief of staff’s wife was reproached by Denmark’s ambassador to the U.S. for a social media post about the possible move.

Trump has consistently discussed annexing Greenland since before retaking office in January 2025, but has also long been rebuffed on the idea by officials in both Denmark and Greenland.

But at a news conference on Saturday morning after the U.S. apprehension of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio both alluded to the potential of U.S. military action elsewhere in the Americas.

When asked on Sunday if Maduro’s apprehension should be interpreted by other nations — for instance, Greenland, which does not want to be annexed — as a signal that his administration might consider military action to pursue more goals, Trump demurred.

“They are going to have to view it themselves,” Trump told The Atlantic in an interview on Sunday. “I really don’t know … But we do need Greenland, absolutely. We need it for defense.”

He also noted that the NATO ally is “surrounded by Russian and Chinese ships.”

Trump previously has refused to rule out military action to annex Greenland, saying in May that he wouldn’t “say I’m not going to do it but I don’t rule out anything … We need Greenland very badly,” The Guardian reported.

Greenland, which is the world’s largest island, is a self-governing territory of Denmark. It is largely covered with ice, though it has oil, natural gas and mineral resources, and already is home to the United States’ northernmost military base.

Trump said in a nationally televised speech in March that his administration was “working with everybody involved to try and get it.”

“We need it really for international world security,” he said during the speech, adding that he thought “we’re going to get it, one way or the other.”

At the time, Greenland Prime Minister Mute Egede said in a Facebook post that Greenland would determine it’s own future and does not what to be Americans any more than they want to be Danish.

Trump’s recently named Greenland envoy, Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry, said in December that the United States is not going to “go in there trying to conquer anybody.”

Landry also said in December that he was thankful to Trump for the “honor to serve you in this volunteer position to make Greenland a part of the United States,” The Guardian reported.

Denmark’s ambassador to the United States, Jesper Moeller Soerensen, responded to a Saturday post on X by Katie Miller, wife of White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, that depicted Greenland with a U.S. map overlaid on it with the word “SOON,” the BBC reported.

“Just a friendly reminder about the U.S. and Denmark: We are close allies and should continue to work together as such,” Soerensen said in a response on X.

“And yes, we expect full respect for the territorial integrity of the Kingdom of Denmark,” Soerensen added.

In less than 24 hours, the US bombed Venezuela, brazenly abducted President Nicolas Maduro and his wife from their compound in Caracas and whisked them to a detention centre in New York. Here’s how regime change unfolded overnight.

Jan. 4 (UPI) — Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in interviews on Sunday that it is “premature” to discuss elections in Venezuela because higher priorities, including reinvigorating the country’s oil industry, must be addressed first.

In interviews with ABC, CBS and NBC, Rubio said that the United States will continue to strike drug boats and detain oil tankers as the Trump administration moves to stabilize and “run” Venezuela after the apprehension of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro on Saturday.

The Trump administration plans to keep its “quarantine” of Venezuelan oil in place as it pressures the remainders of Maduro’s government to end their cooperation with South American drug gangs, as well as stop selling oil to the United States’ adversaries, Rubio said.

“As we move forward here, we’ll set the conditions so that we no longer have in our hemisphere a Venezuela that’s the crossroads for many of our adversaries around the world, including Iran and Hezbollah,” Rubio said on ABC News’ “This Week.”

Rubio added that Venezuela would also no longer be “a narcotrafficking paradise for all those drugs coming out of Colombia … and toward the United States.”

Offshore armada is ‘leverage’

In a press conference on Saturday, Trump told reporters that there was a second strike planned in the case that Venezuelan forces responded to Maduro’s capture or the plan was not successful, but U.S. military commanders decided against launching it.

Trump noted Saturday, and Rubio reiterated on Sunday, that the roughly 15,000 troops offshore of Venezuela spread across more than a dozen warships would remain in the Caribbean.

Their objectives, he told CBS’ “Face The Nation,” are striking drug trafficking boats, apprehending tankers suspected to be carrying sanctioned Venezuelan oil and using the armada, as Trump has referred to it, of U.S. military ships offshore to encourage the remaining members of Maduro’s administration to comply with U.S. demands.

“What’s going to happen here is that we have a quarantine on their oil,” Rubio said. “That the means that their economy will not be able to move forward until the conditions that are in the national interest of the United States and of the Venezuelan people are met.”

“So, that leverage remains,” he added. “That leverage is ongoing. And we expect that it’s going to lead to results here.”

No elections yet

Although the Trump administration “cares about elections, we care about democracy, we care about all of that,” the priority is the U.S.’ goals of stopping the flow of drugs into the United States and U.S. “safety, security, well-being and prosperity,” Rubio told NBC News’ “Meet The Press.”

At this point, he said, considering new elections in Venezuela “is premature at this point” as Trump has tasked Rubio with “running policy” in the South American country.

In the next several months, Rubio said that the main priorities are to end entanglements between the Venezuelan government and drug gangs, as well as to prevent Iran, Russia, China and Cuba, among other nations, from investing in the country and gaining a foothold in the Western Hemisphere.

Maduro and his wife, who are in a jail in New York City awaiting trial, along with four other people in the Venezuelan government who were not arrested in Saturday’s raid, have been indicted for allegedly working with Colombian drug gangs and rebel groups to assist them in trafficking cocaine.

The quarantine on ships transporting Venezuelan oil is linked to Trump’s goal of sending U.S. oil companies to inspect and reinvigorate Venezuela’s ailing oil industry, while keeping the oil in the Americas.

While noting that the United States, which is a net oil exporter, does not need the oil, he questioned why Iran, Russia or China should need Venezuelan oil considering all three are nowhere near South America.

“They’re not even in this continent,” Rubio said. “This is where we live, and we’re not going to allow the Western Hemisphere to be a base of operations for adversaries, competitors and rivals of the United States.”