Connect with us

America

The First Casualty of Trump’s New World: Welcome to Stable Chaos, Goodbye Maduro

Published

on

As Yunus Emre Erdölen underlines, Trump’s concern is neither democracy nor drugs; as he himself openly states, it is Venezuelan oil and U.S. interests.What once happened behind closed doors in Trump’s new world is now unfolding right before our eyes. The rudeness of hard power stands naked in all its rawness and brutality. For this reason, seriously sitting down to debate whether “Maduro was good or bad” or whether “the attack was legal or illegal” has little importance in this new world.

Exactly 35 years ago, on January 3, 1990, American soldiers blasted rock songs through large speakers in front of the Vatican Embassy in Panama. The Clash’s “I Fought the Law,” U2’s “All I Want Is You,” and Bruce Cockburn’s “If I Had a Rocket Launcher” were just a few of the “symbolic” songs on the American soldiers’ playlist.

Of course, the American soldiers were not carrying out a cultural initiative to promote 1990s hit songs in a Latin American country hundreds of kilometers away from their homeland. When Panama’s dictator Manuel Noriega—once supported by the CIA and the United States—began acting against U.S. interests and using money obtained from drug trafficking against America, U.S. President George H. W. Bush pressed the button and decided to remove Noriega. The operation that began in December 1989 involved 27,000 American troops; Panama was invaded, and Noriega, who had no real support among the people, could not resist and sought refuge in the Vatican Embassy.

To exert psychological pressure on Noriega, an opera-loving dictator, American soldiers surrounded the embassy building and blasted rock music at full volume day and night. However, this psychological torture lasted only three days. The Vatican told the United States that embassy staff were also disturbed and requested the music be stopped, and the Americans put the speakers back into their trunks.

Despite the end of the American rock music torture, Noriega’s resistance was broken in 10 days. Fearing that he would be lynched by his own people, he surrendered to American forces and was taken to the United States by Delta Force units to stand trial.

Noriega was sentenced to 40 years for drug trafficking and money laundering, released in 2007 for good behavior, then extradited to France where he was convicted and imprisoned, and later returned to Panama to serve his sentence there. He died at the age of 83 in the hospital where he was receiving treatment.

By sheer coincidence, exactly 35 years later, again on a January 3, American soldiers once more abducted a Latin American leader from his country with Delta Force units and brought him to the United States to stand trial.

But this time not by blasting rock music in front of an embassy—rather by storming a sitting president’s bedroom and abducting him and his wife in their pajamas, forcing them onto a helicopter.

Venezuela’s Curse, Law’s Lament

In the Venezuela operation—originally planned for Christmas but delayed due to attacks in Nigeria—the United States first bombed military targets and symbolic locations such as Chávez’s tomb. Then, using intelligence sources close to Maduro, a special Delta Force team raided the private compound where he was staying. American soldiers stormed Maduro and his wife’s bedroom and woke them from their sleep. As the couple ran toward their shelter, they were prevented from closing the door and were taken in their pajamas onto a helicopter, then transferred to a military ship waiting in open waters.

The “official” justification for the operation—which Trump himself said he watched “like watching television”—was drug trafficking and Maduro’s alleged anti-democratic rule. But Trump himself does not even emphasize these official reasons. Trump openly states that the United States will distribute Venezuelan oil and profit from it, even stressing that it will be managed in a way that benefits everyone by sharing it with countries like China.

Trump’s decision to abduct a country’s leader from his bed without involving Congress violates both international law and American law. And yes, Maduro is an autocrat who condemned his country to rigged elections, high inflation, corruption, and poverty.

After Chávez’s death in 2013, Maduro took office and, when he lost the 2015 parliamentary elections to the opposition, steered decisively toward autocracy. First, in order to block the opposition’s constitutional majority, the Supreme Court annulled the mandates of three MPs, depriving the opposition of its two-thirds majority. Then, again through the court, parliament’s powers were stripped on the grounds of alleged electoral fraud and transferred to the judiciary, with parliamentary immunity lifted to prosecute lawmakers. Although parliament’s powers were later nominally restored amid backlash, Maduro’s government deemed the legislature illegitimate and ignored its will.

Maduro then called for a constituent assembly to draft a new constitution and held a referendum boycotted by the opposition. With only 41% turnout, Maduro supporters won all seats. The Constituent Assembly’s first act was to abolish the powers of the legitimately elected opposition parliament and redesign the political balance under Maduro’s command.

The opposition, which refused to recognize Maduro’s disputed 2018 victory, took to the streets, organized mass protests with millions participating, declared parliamentary speaker Juan Guaidó the legitimate president, and sought to delegitimize Maduro internationally. Rather than legitimizing a rigged system by narrowly losing, the opposition chose to reject it outright.

By clinging to power against his own people, Maduro imposed a permanent instability on his country, triggered a humanitarian crisis that forced 7 million people to flee over the past decade, and presided over a catastrophic economic collapse. Even left-wing governments in Colombia, Chile, and Brazil distanced themselves from Maduro. Still, the opposition persisted and organized a massive primary in 2023 with 2.5 million voters. Opposition leader María Corina Machado—who won 93% of the vote—later received the Nobel Peace Prize.

Despite mediation efforts by countries like Norway and agreements that politics should not be shaped through bans, Venezuela’s judiciary once again barred Machado from running and later excluded her substitute candidate from the ballot due to “technical issues.” Machado then arranged for the last-minute candidacy of little-known former diplomat Edmundo González, whom the Maduro government assumed could not win.

Under constant threat of arrest, Machado campaigned alongside González and mobilized voters despite political bans. Claiming victory based on signed tally sheets, the opposition was met with repression as the Maduro regime declared itself the winner with 51% and accused the opposition of disinformation. Numerous international bodies, including left-wing Latin American governments, questioned the election’s legitimacy. As repression intensified, the label “dictator” became openly used.

González, declared the legitimate president by Maduro-opposing countries, sought refuge in the Spanish consulate after publishing the tally sheets and fled to Madrid on a private military plane.

Two years later, it was Maduro who was forced to leave his country by helicopter—abducted from his bedroom on Trump’s orders. The Maduro regime was unplugged.

But none of this really matters. Because in Trump’s world, “who is right, who is wrong; what is democratic or not; what is legal or not” is irrelevant.

The Weak Are Crushed

Debates over whether Maduro is a “brave anti-imperialist” or a “brutal dictator” belong to the old world. In Trump’s new world, raw power reigns. States always suspended principles through hard power, but they used to at least cloak it in justification. Trump’s America no longer needs even that.

This is not about drugs—Trump just last week pardoned a former Honduran leader convicted of drug trafficking, calling the trial unfair.

This is not about democracy—Trump openly supports and praises autocrats worldwide and draws inspiration from them for his own country.

As Trump has made abundantly clear, this is about pure economic and pragmatic interests: oil and U.S. spheres of influence. What once happened behind closed doors is now done in plain sight. The message to the world is simple: only power matters. Maduro and his regime became the first to be eliminated in this new order because of their inability to even protect their leader’s bedroom.

There is little point in engaging in neat “neither Maduro nor the U.S.” debates or theoretical discussions in a world governed by brute force.

Like it or not, this is the new world order. The gates of hell are open; everything is permissible. When Trump feels like it, he can have a head of state abducted from his bed in pajamas.

This time not with rock music, but with a massive televised spectacle designed to distract from the Epstein files and win over Hispanic American voters fleeing left-wing autocrats ahead of the 2026 midterms.

Trump has launched the 2026 season of his new reality show, with himself as the star and the world as a powerless audience.

Maduro was the first contestant to be voted off the island.

This year’s theme: Stable chaos.

We’d better get used to it. Unfortunately.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

America

Inside ‘Regime Change’: Trump Claims He is Above Stalin, Mao, Even Hitler

Published

on

A forthcoming book by NYT reporters reveals new insights into Trump’s presidency, detailing how he evaluates his authority in world-historical terms alongside past dictators and operates with a strict focus on retribution and media optics.

A forthcoming book titled “Regime Change: Inside the Imperial Presidency of Donald Trump,” authored by Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan, reveals that Trump has begun evaluating his presidential authority in world-historical terms.

The publication indicates Trump places himself in the lineage of historical conquerors, dictators, and strongmen who reshaped nations through fear and force.

Authors Haberman and Swan noted the evident pleasure and untroubled ease with which the U.S. president accepted a conceptual place alongside figures such as Mao and Hitler.

In interviews, Trump reflected on his power by comparing it to that of historical rulers such as Alexander the Great, Napoleon, Mao, and Stalin.

He argued that he possessed greater global reach because ancient and early modern rulers lacked contemporary transportation capabilities, stating that those past figures “didn’t have airplanes.”

Retribution and ‘Plot Twists’

Trump returned to office in 2025 with a strong desire for retribution against individuals he believed had wronged him.

According to the book, Trump sought to target Chris Krebs, a former official who rejected claims of widespread fraud in the 2020 election.

After aides reminded him of Krebs’s name, Trump ordered the Justice Department to investigate the former official.

The book also highlights how Trump views high-level appointments through the lens of media production and optics.

When Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s nomination faced scrutiny, Trump considered replacing him with Ron DeSantis, stating, “We need plot twists.”

Trump ultimately retained Hegseth, who later regularly showed the president graphic footage of drone strikes, which one official referred to as “Hegseth’s snuff films.”

Furthermore, Trump explained his selection of John Ratcliffe as CIA director by stating, “If you were going to cast a guy to play CIA director, that’s who you’d pick.”

Geopolitical Views and Private Interactions

The manuscript details Trump’s transactional and unorthodox approach to foreign policy and global leaders as well.

During a high-level Oval Office meeting, Trump remarked, “I’m not a big fan of Ukraine. Except their women. They keep winning Miss Universe.”

He later described his public confrontation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as “great television” and “better than The Apprentice.”

In private conversations regarding Latin America, Trump told several associates that “Venezuela could be America’s 51st state and that he would appoint a governor to run it.”

His interactions with European allies followed a similar pattern; while discussing plans for a triumphal arch in Washington, Trump called French President Emmanuel Macron to ask whether the Arc de Triomphe was dangerous, questioning, “What do you think, Emmanuel, do people jump off it?”

‘Look at Them Now’

Following the 2024 election, Trump took satisfaction in seeing technology industry leaders who had once opposed him seek his favor.

He described figures such as Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos as “kissing my ass” and remarked to Elon Musk, “They hated me … and look at them now.”

Domestically, the book reveals the administrative friction caused by external crises.

Senior White House officials held multiple meetings in the Situation Room to manage the political fallout from the Jeffrey Epstein controversy, focusing on its impact on Trump’s supporters and allegations appearing in government documents.

Additionally, the book notes Trump was visibly shaken by the assassination of Charlie Kirk, learning of the event from his son Barron under anxious circumstances that mirrored concerns over Trump’s own security following a 2024 assassination attempt.

Continue Reading

America

“Wake Up”: Vance Reminds Israel It Has No Other Powerful Ally

Published

on

US Vice President JD Vance sharply criticized Netanyahu’s government during a press briefing warning Israel it has no powerful ally other than Trump. He also defended the Iran MOU and told critics of the Iran deal to trust the president who “got us this far.”

US Vice President JD Vance warned the Israeli government, telling it directly that attacking its only remaining powerful ally is a strategic mistake, and that two-thirds of the weapons protecting Israel over the past 3 months were built and paid for by American hands and American taxpayers.

“The problem for Israel is not Donald J. Trump,” Vance said, “and anybody in Israel who thinks their biggest problem is the President of the United States needs to wake up and smell the reality of the situation that country is in.”

“The Only Powerful Ally Left in the Entire World”

The vice president reminded that the US-Israel relationship in stark terms of dependency.

“Donald J. Trump is the only head of state in the entire world who is sympathetic to the nation of Israel at this moment in time,” he said.

“If I was in the cabinet of the Israeli government, I might not be attacking the only powerful ally that I have anywhere left in the entire world.”

On reports that Netanyahu is “fuming” over US-Iran diplomacy, he said “I saw the Axios report that says Netanyahu is fuming. That’s not reflective of the conversations that I’ve had with him. Maybe he is saying something to somebody else that he is not saying to me”.

To critics of the deal more broadly, Vance told: “Have a little faith in the president’s ability, given that he’s got us this far, to take us the final step.”

How the MOU Came Together

Vance said Iran asked for the text of MOU not to be released until Friday, a request the US accommodated despite wanting immediate publication.

“I didn’t really understand that – I wanted to get the text out immediately,” Vance said.

He said foreign leaders may have been pressuring Iran during the Monday-Tuesday window while Trump was at the G7.

Ultimately, Iran’s president and Trump both signed the document, and the text was released immediately upon signing.

Vance also said “As they dial up their good behavior, we can dial up the economic relief; if they dial down their good behavior, we can turn it off”.

Iran’s Nuclear Commitments and Missile Capability

Vance said Iran has made concrete nuclear commitments under the MOU, including the destruction of its highly enriched uranium stockpile.

On missiles, he acknowledged the program was not eliminated entirely.

“Their ability to launch missiles has been substantially degraded. Is it zero? No. But it’s substantially degraded. We haven’t abandoned that mission. We accomplished it,” he said.

On what stops Iran from rebuilding its nuclear program down the road, Vance pointed to economics.

“First of all, they would have to get a lot of money in order to rebuild their nuclear program,” he said, noting that sanctions would snap back if Iran reversed course.

The $300 Billion Fund and Frozen Assets

When asked who is funding a reported $300 billion fund for Iran, Vance pointed to regional interest rather than US commitment.

“There is a great desire from the Arab world, and from outside the Arab world, to actually get involved in Iran if they behave properly,” he said.

On frozen Iranian assets, Vance was candid about his own uncertainty.

“I’ve heard numbers north of 100 billion dollars. I’ve actually heard numbers north of 200 billion dollars. Most of it is not in United States accounts; most of it’s either in the Gulf, or in Europe, or somewhere else. But I don’t know the exact amount of money – it’s a lot,” he said.

He also pushed back on reports that Qatar had released billions in Iranian assets.

“That’s just not true. It would be impossible for the Qataris to do that without our buy-in,” Vance said.

Vance also addressed the lifting of the Strait of Hormuz blockade, saying: “All we’ve done is lift the blockade in the Strait – that would basically return it to where it was before the conflict.”

He added that US troop levels would return to pre-conflict levels, saying both Washington and Tehran have no interest in maintaining extra aircraft carrier groups in the region.

Continue Reading

America

Trump Wants to Punish Spain & NATO Allies Over Iran War

Published

on

A Pentagon email has revealed the U.S. has outlined options to punish NATO allies for not supporting the war on Iran, including suspending Spain, amid growing European defiance of U.S. policy & a parallel push by EU countries to deepen ties with China.

Washington is weighing punitive measures against NATO partners it views as unwilling to support operations in the Iran war, according to an internal Pentagon policy email.

The memo, circulating at senior Pentagon levels, frames access, basing and overflight rights as “just the absolute baseline for NATO,” according to a U.S. official who talked to Reuters for its exclusive. It proposes suspending “difficult” countries from key alliance roles, with Spain specifically identified due to its refusal to allow bases or airspace to be used for strikes on Iran.

Spain hosts two major U.S. installations – Naval Station Rota and Morón Air Base – making its stance operationally relevant even if suspension would be largely symbolic in military terms.

One option includes suspending Spain from NATO structures, while another suggests reassessing U.S. diplomatic support for British control of the Falkland Islands, a dispute dating back to the 1982 war in which 650 Argentine and 255 British personnel were killed.

The measures aim to reduce what officials describe as a European “sense of entitlement,” signaling frustration with allies that declined to support U.S. naval operations to reopen the Strait of Hormuz after the war began on Feb. 28.

Pentagon Press Secretary Kingsley Wilson said allies “were not there for us,” adding the department would ensure options to make partners “do their part.”

President Donald Trump has echoed this view, asking, “Wouldn’t you if you were me?” when discussing potential U.S. withdrawal from NATO.

He also criticized Spain directly, saying, “Their financial numbers… are absolutely horrendous,” accusing them of contributing little to NATO defense.

Spain’s Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez rejected the report, stating governments “do not work off emails.”

In parallel, Spain has continued its anti-war stance. They have pushed to suspend the EU-Israel agreement, citing alleged breaches of international law, though Euronews said the effort lacks consensus, with Germany and Italy opposing it.

Meanwhile president Sánchez, speaking in China, said Europe should “strengthen ties with China,” reflecting broader strategic divergence within the alliance.

The dispute comes as NATO, now 76 years old, faces questions about cohesion. U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth complained Nato wouldn’t be much of an alliance if members hesitate to act, noting Iran’s missiles can reach Europe even if not the United States.

The Iran war, now in its eighth week, has exposed divisions over risk-sharing, military access, and the scope of alliance obligations, with policy options under review but no formal decisions announced.

Continue Reading

Trending