The US military operation that captured Venezuela’s president on Saturday is likely to force governments across Latin America to reassess how far China and Russia can protect their partners when Washington decides to act, according to analysts, as the United States signals a more assertive approach to the region.
The operation, which removed President Nicolas Maduro and placed Venezuela under a US-managed “transition”, marked the most direct American military action in Latin America in decades.
It gave concrete form to US President Donald Trump’s newly released national security strategy, which asserts US primacy in the western hemisphere, according to US officials.
“What matters is not the rhetoric, but whether it is followed by action,” said Eric Farnsworth, a senior associate with the Americas Programme at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.
“What happened in Venezuela shows this is not just language in a strategy document,” he added.
Trump said US forces would remain in place for the foreseeable future and that Washington would oversee a political transition while keeping Venezuelan oil flowing to global markets, including China.
The White House framed the operation as both a national security and law enforcement action following US indictments against Maduro on drug trafficking charges.
Trump reinforced that message on Sunday night, using unusually blunt language to suggest the US could expand its pressure beyond Venezuela to other governments in the region.
Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One, he derided Colombian President Gustavo Petro as “a sick man” and described both Colombia and Venezuela as “very sick” countries. When asked whether that meant the US could take military action against Colombia, Trump replied: “Sounds good to me.”
The president said Cuba’s government appeared to be weakening and “looks ready to fall”, while also urging Mexico to “get their act together” and suggesting he would take action to address drug trafficking there.
Across Latin America, governments responded with public statements urging restraint and respect for sovereignty, while privately weighing the implications of a US intervention that removed a sitting president allied with Beijing and Moscow.
Russia, a long-time political and military supporter of Caracas, condemned the operation but took no concrete steps, a response Farnsworth said would resonate across the region.
Moscow lacks both the capability and the willingness to come to Maduro’s defence, he noted, making it an unlikely security guarantor for governments seeking to balance against Washington.
China is Venezuela’s largest oil buyer and has extended tens of billions of dollars in loans to Caracas over the past two decades, much of it repaid through discounted oil shipments rather than cash.
Beijing condemned the US operation and demanded Maduro’s release, but like Russia has taken no action beyond diplomatic protest.
“They cannot change the outcome,” said Farnsworth, noting that Beijing’s influence in Latin America has been built primarily through trade, not security guarantees.
In his view, China has deliberately avoided a military role in the region, choosing instead to expand its presence through loans, energy contracts and infrastructure projects that deepen economic ties without directly challenging US security dominance.
This approach has allowed Beijing to build influence through trade and financing while limiting political and strategic exposure. But the US operation in Venezuela underscored the constraints of that model.
Parsifal D’Sola Alvarado, executive director of the Andres Bello Foundation, a China-focused think tank based in Bogota, said Beijing’s muted response was consistent with long-standing limits on how far China is willing to go, with any pushback likely to remain confined to diplomatic channels such as the United Nations.
“In fact, this US move will likely reinforce China’s existing approach to South America,” he said, “with a focus on economic ties and access to natural resources, while staying as far away as possible from security and military cooperation. And I think the Chinese are perfectly fine with that.”
Farnsworth argued that governments in the region are likely to distinguish between economic partnership and crisis support, concluding that whilst China can provide investment and markets, it has shown little capacity or willingness to intervene when partners face direct pressure from Washington.
He added that Beijing now faces a strategic choice: accept those constraints or reassess how far it is prepared to go to defend its interests in the western hemisphere, a calculation that risks sharper confrontation with the United States.
For many South American nations, both analysts said, the lesson may not be to sever economic ties with China but to manage them more carefully.
Engagement with Beijing is expected to continue, particularly in trade and infrastructure, but with greater caution around security-related cooperation and a lower political profile to avoid provoking Washington.
“That will change the geopolitical calculations of every government, and countries will be much more careful in how they engage with China,” D’Sola noted.
“Even Brazil, the largest economy in the region, with very tight political and economic relations with China, will be more careful about what it does, especially in terms of security and infrastructure with potential dual use.”
Inside Venezuela, the outlook remains uncertain. Whilst many Venezuelans welcomed Maduro’s removal, much of the governing structure remains intact, including senior political figures and military commanders who have not pledged loyalty to the opposition or to the US.
Trump has sent mixed signals about the next phase, at times saying the US would “run” Venezuela, while senior officials later stressed that Washington does not intend to govern the country directly.
Opposition leader Maria Corina Machado has said her movement is ready to assume power, but after some initial confrontational tone, Vice-President Delcy Rodriguez has toned down her rhetoric and extended “an invitation to the US government to work together on an agenda for cooperation”.
“The biggest risk now is prolonged ambiguity,” Farnsworth said. Without a clear political road map, he warned, public optimism could fade quickly.
“Most Venezuelans didn’t leave because of economic conditions,” Farnsworth said. “They left because they lost hope. They didn’t think anything would change. And if they see that even without Maduro nothing is going to change, you’re going to have more migrants.”
The continued presence of armed loyalists and unresolved questions over who controls the security forces raise the risk of a contested transition. While comparisons to Afghanistan are premature, he said, the likelihood of instability increases the longer competing centres of power remain in place.
“I think there will be a division,” Farnsworth said.
“Some will try to stay loyal to the political Chavista leadership, and some will try to offer loyalty to the constitution and to an incoming government, if and when that happens. But until the situation is clearer, people are not going to risk their lives, their families or their fortunes.” -- SOUTH CHINA MORNING POST
