Posted by AI on 2025-10-11 22:29:21 | Last Updated by AI on 2026-02-05 17:46:45
Share: Facebook | Twitter | Whatsapp | Linkedin Visits: 29
In a dramatic display of force, the U.S. military has launched a series of strikes off the Venezuelan coast, leaving at least 21 people dead. President Donald Trump has framed these attacks as a necessary escalation in the "armed conflict" against drug cartels. However, experts and data paint a different picture, one that raises questions about the true objectives of this Caribbean campaign.
The New York Times' investigation reveals a stark contrast between the stated goals and the reality of the drug trade. Venezuela, it seems, is a minor player in the global cocaine market. The vast majority of the world's cocaine originates from Colombia, Peru, and Bolivia, primarily traversing the Pacific Ocean, not the Caribbean, en route to the U.S. market. Furthermore, fentanyl, the deadly opioid driving overdose rates in the U.S., is predominantly produced in Mexico, not Venezuela, using chemicals sourced from Asia.
Former U.S. ambassador to Venezuela, James Story, offers a compelling analogy, suggesting that the military's strategy is akin to "using a blowtorch to cook an egg." Despite the aggressive tactics, the adaptability of trafficking networks means that any disruption is likely to be temporary. This raises the question: Is the real target of these strikes the drug trade or Venezuela's President, Nicolas Maduro?
The Miami Herald's sources indicate a comprehensive military blockade in the Caribbean, targeting the 'Cartel de los Soles,' allegedly operated by Maduro and his military elite. Yet, the broader implications of this operation are unclear. As the Trump administration vows to use all means necessary to protect U.S. borders, the world watches, awaiting the outcome of this high-stakes maritime maneuver. Will it be a successful drug interdiction or a geopolitical chess move with unforeseen consequences?