by MHI
Editor’s note: MHI will follow up with an in-depth analysis of the implications of the January 3, 2026 kidnapping of Maduro, but we issue this brief statement now, as events are still unfolding.
See also Commentary / Comentario: On the Kidnapping of / Sobre el Secuestro de Nicolás Maduro by Francisco Palacios.
Marxist-Humanist Initiative condemns the Trump regime’s nakedly-imperialist invasion of Venezuela and its kidnapping of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and Cilia Flores, his wife. The Trump regime killed dozens of Venezuelans and violated both US and international law. Its actions threaten to plunge international relations into a state of chaos and to force the young men and women of the US to fight yet another protracted quagmire of a war, contrary to the wishes of the great majority of Americans. The regime’s subsequent saber-rattling against Greenland, Colombia, Cuba, and other countries has only added fuel to the fire.
There are also dangers on the global scale because the kidnapping has signaled the dawn of a new era. The Trump regime’s saber-rattling against other countries in both North and South America helps to make clear that the kidnapping and their attempt to control Venezuela is just one piece of a larger puzzle. The Trumpites are hoping to replace the international order that existed from the end of World War II until last year with a new redivision of the world reminiscent of the “Great Power” imperialism that prevailed before World War I, a world in which the US dominates the Americas, Russia dominates Europe, and China dominates Asia. In other words, Putin’s poodle is acting to help realize Vladimir Putin’s dream of “multipolarity.”
Nicolás Maduro, and his wife, Cilia Flores, appear in Manhattan federal court on January 5. Drawing by Christine Cornell, CNN.
Indeed, Dr. Fiona Hill, who served as a national security adviser during Trump’s first term, told Congress in 2019 that Putin’s regime had proposed a “very strange swap arrangement between Venezuela and Ukraine,” in which the US is allowed to control Venezuela while Russia is allowed to control Ukraine. While the Kremlin has denounced the attack on Venezuela and has called for Maduro’s release, “Russia’s support for Venezuela has been more symbolic than practical,” as Neil Melvin, an expert at the Royal United Services Institute, put it.
The Venezuelan people did not choose Maduro to lead them. He held power by means of repression, electoral fraud, and other undemocratic measures as set out in this Amnesty International report. We condemn the kidnapping and invasion, not because we support or excuse the Maduro regime, but because the people of Venezuela should be the ones to determine their destiny, not Donald Trump. He is not their liberator. Far from it. Trump has made clear that the aims of his invasion—to the extent it has any aims other than performative display of a bully’s power—are to control Venezuela and its oil, and to skim off oil profits for himself and “MAGA Billionaire” Paul Singer. He wants to run Venezuela from Washington, by giving marching orders to a Trump-friendly government.
It is far from clear that he will succeed. While acting Venezuelan president Delcy Rodríguez evidently conspired with the Trump regime to kidnap Maduro, it is unclear whether she is willing to be its puppet. It is also unclear how much power she has within Venezuela. The country may now endure severe political instability, which does not serve the interests of the Venezuelan masses any more than does a puppet regime. The kidnapping of Maduro has already disrupted the lives of Venezuelans. Tensions have risen in Caracas as supplies of medicine and food have run low. Facing an uncertain situation that could lead to widespread unrest, people have started hoarding supplies. Their fears are realistic, not capitulation to fear-mongering. After all, Trump just proved that “anything goes,” and a Trump-style regime could start running the country. This makes the kidnapping an attack, not only against the Maduro regime, but against Venezuela’s working class and peasants.
Marxists and supporters of liberal democracy have long fought for the principle of national self-determination. The new situation signals the Trump regime’s complete repudiation of this principle, not only in Venezuela, but around the world. In contrast to previous presidents, Trump does not even pay lip service to it. He does not recognize a country’s right to territorial integrity, or its right to hold general elections without outside interference. Instead, his regime formulates “plans” for countries in its sphere of influence. What comes next, an invasion of Canada, Cuba, Greenland?
Trump and his lackeys are the main perpetrators of the attack on Venezuela, but their many enablers—including the soft-on-Trump “left” that helped him rise and return to power—also bear responsibility. As Josh Marshall noted on Wednesday, “This has been a rough week for the rubes who bought the idea that Trump was in some way anti-war.” It has likewise been a rough week for those on “the left” whose dreams of political power led them to pander to Trump’s base and Trumpism.
The question now is, how will they respond as events unfold? Will they side with what remains of the Maduro regime? Will they confine their discourse to “this is a blatant violation of international law”? Will they continue to be soft on Trump, excusing his imperialist incursion with “Maduro is bad” apologetics?
That Maduro has repressed his own people is undeniable, but what is at issue now is the very tangible danger that the whole world will descend into chaos. To help end this crisis, regime change, in Washington, is urgently needed.
Be the first to comment