U.S. Military Executes Complex Operation in Venezuela Successfully

On January 3, 2026, the United States military executed a highly coordinated operation in Venezuela aimed at capturing President Nicolas Maduro. Reports indicate that the mission, known as Operation Absolute Resolve, was meticulously planned and successfully carried out, highlighting the capabilities of U.S. forces. While this operation marks a significant achievement, it also serves as a reminder of the inherent risks involved in military actions.

The successful capture of Maduro was not without its complexities. Historical precedents, such as President Jimmy Carter‘s failed attempt to rescue American hostages during Operation Eagle Claw in 1980, emphasize the unpredictability of military operations. That mission ended in tragedy when a helicopter collided with an aircraft, resulting in the deaths of eight servicemembers and a failed rescue attempt that left hostages in captivity until early 1981.

As military leaders celebrate the success in Venezuela, it is crucial for civilian policymakers to approach future military actions with caution. The ease with which the operation unfolded should not lead to overconfidence. The reality is that military engagements rarely go as planned, and strategies must account for possible failures. The 19th-century military strategist Helmuth von Moltke famously stated, “No plan survives first contact with the enemy.” This axiom underscores the necessity for comprehensive contingency planning.

Military planners typically anticipate various challenges, such as mechanical failures or casualties, when developing operational strategies. However, it is equally important for civilian leaders to consider potential outcomes and their responses in the event of failure. In the case of the Venezuelan raid, questions arise: What would the government have done had the mission not succeeded? Would a second attempt have been made? Would officials have acknowledged defeat, or would they have escalated the situation to regain lost political capital?

These considerations are essential. The political ramifications of military actions can be profound. The primary objective of the Venezuela operation was to bring Maduro to justice in the United States. President Trump invested significant political capital in ordering the mission, which involved deploying 150 aircraft to neutralize defenses while a special forces team attempted to capture Maduro and his wife at their residence.

Had the Maduros not been where intelligence indicated or if helicopters had been shot down, the ramifications could have been dire. The president would have faced a critical decision: to publicly acknowledge the failure, as President John F. Kennedy did after the Bay of Pigs invasion, or to escalate the military response, potentially leading to a full ground invasion.

This potential for escalation highlights the importance of a guiding principle for policymakers, one that could be termed the “Normandy Threshold.” The Allied invasion of France on June 6, 1944, illustrated a full commitment to achieving victory over Germany during World War II. It was only after years of less decisive efforts that President Franklin D. Roosevelt and Prime Minister Winston Churchill recognized that only a significant ground offensive could compel the Germans to surrender.

Ideally, military operations would consistently proceed as smoothly as the Venezuela mission. Policymakers would set clear, achievable objectives, and military planners would execute quick and decisive operations. However, such success is often the exception rather than the rule.

Moving forward, decision-makers must prioritize strategic contingency planning. By ensuring that they consider the ramifications of military actions thoroughly, they can mitigate risks and navigate the complexities of international conflict. The infrequent tactical victories will be all the more rewarding when policymakers engage with a disciplined approach to military strategy.