Feb 05, 2026 | by Akash O'Neal, Colearn Chronicle Journalist

The U.S. military forces conducted a strike operation targeting locations in Venezuela. U.S. officials described this action as limited, aimed at addressing security threats identified by American intelligence agencies. According to U.S. government statements, the operation also involved the seizure of Venezuela’s president and his wife, who were brought to the United States to face trial.

U.S. authorities claimed that the president and his wife engaged in extensive criminal activities. These included large-scale drug importation, partnerships with international drug-trafficking groups, and running networks that facilitated narcotics shipments into the United States. Prosecutors further alleged that the president and his wife ordered kidnappings, beatings, and murders against those who threatened their drug operations, along with other acts related to organized crime and corruption. U.S. officials stated that these allegations provided the legal grounds for the operation and the following prosecution.

Venezuelan authorities confirmed military activity and reported disturbances in important areas. However, they rejected U.S. claims, calling the operation a violation of national sovereignty. They described the seizure of the president and his wife as an unlawful abduction. The Venezuelan government denied all accusations of drug trafficking and violent crimes, insisting that the charges were politically motivated.

Independent verification of the damage, casualties, and the full extent of the operation was not available immediately. The United States framed the strike as part of a broader policy aimed at regional security, organized crime, and alleged trafficking networks. U.S. officials emphasized that the action was not meant to declare war but to serve as a targeted enforcement measure under national security and law enforcement.

International reactions were varied. Some governments called for restraint and adherence to international law, while others asked for clarification from U.S. officials regarding the operation's legal justification. Multilateral organizations encouraged de-escalation and dialogue over concerns about regional stability. Currently, the long-term political, diplomatic, and economic effects of the strike and prosecution are unclear. Analysts caution that these events could significantly impact regional relations, sanctions policies, and ongoing discussions about trade and security.

< Back