Trump Next MOVE SHOCKS The WORLD

January 12, 2026

Man in suit pointing, speaking at a rally.

A new U.S. military operation in Latin America raises questions of legality and regional stability.

Story Overview

Trump cancels a planned second wave of attacks on Venezuela.
The U.S. military operation captured Nicolás Maduro and Cilia Flores.
Cooperation from Venezuela’s new authorities influenced Trump’s decision.
Critics warn of potential threats to regional stability and international law.

Trump Cancels Second Wave of Attacks on Venezuela

On January 9, 2026, President Donald Trump publicly announced via Truth Social that he had canceled a planned second wave of military attacks on Venezuela. This decision followed a significant U.S. operation on January 3, 2026, which resulted in the capture of de facto Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores. Trump cited cooperation from Venezuela’s new authorities, which included prisoner releases and collaboration on rebuilding oil and gas infrastructure, as key reasons for halting further military action.

The capture of Maduro marked a pivotal moment in U.S.-Venezuela relations. The operation was part of a broader U.S. military buildup in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific, justified by Washington as counter-narcotics efforts. However, this use of force has drawn criticism from human rights organizations and U.S. lawmakers. They argue that the operation violated international law and U.S. constitutional norms, emphasizing the absence of congressional authorization for military engagement.

Reactions to U.S. Military Actions

Human rights groups have condemned the January 3 attack, labeling it as an unlawful unilateral use of force. They warn that such actions threaten regional stability and undermine Venezuelan self-determination. Critics are particularly concerned about Trump’s rhetoric suggesting that the U.S. might “run” Venezuela, which they argue violates the rights of Venezuelans to self-governance and could set a dangerous precedent for other global powers.

In the U.S., Representative Jim McGovern has been vocal in his condemnation of the operation, highlighting the lack of congressional consultation and likening the situation to an “Iraq-style regime change.” He advocates for international mechanisms, rather than unilateral actions, to hold Maduro accountable for alleged crimes.

Implications for U.S. and Venezuela

The U.S. maintains a strong military presence near Venezuela, with naval ships still deployed despite the cancellation of further strikes. This ongoing posture suggests a strategic leverage over Venezuela’s new government, which is reportedly cooperating with the U.S. on energy projects and prisoner releases. However, details about the new Venezuelan authorities remain unclear, raising questions about their legitimacy and internal dynamics.

Maduro and Flores are currently in U.S. custody facing narco-terrorism charges. While Trump’s administration may pursue prosecution domestically, voices like McGovern suggest that an international tribunal would provide more legitimate accountability. The geopolitical implications of this intervention echo past U.S. involvements in Latin America, revisiting the Monroe Doctrine’s assertion of U.S. dominance in the region.