By Noelle Worley, Co-Editor-in-Chief, and Mallory Mankin, Staff Writer
President Donald Trump gave the go-ahead for “Operation Absolute Resolve” on Jan. 2, ordering U.S. armed forces to commence a military operation and seize the Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. They were taken to New York City, where Maduro will stand trial for drug and gun charges. He has pleaded not guilty.
Michael McKoy, department chair and associate professor of political science and international relations, hosted a “Hot Topic” lecture yesterday in response to these events to discuss the Trump administration’s stated aims and strategies for invading Venezuela. Hot Topic lectures refer to a series of talks hosted by the political science and international relations department that are intended to explain impactful current events in real time. For yesterday’s topic, the Memorial Student Center classroom was full. These lectures are usually advertised to students in this department, but are open to all.
McKoy began by outlining the Trump administration’s stated goals for U.S. involvement in Venezuela. Each aim was conveyed in the chronological order that government officials — particularly President Donald Trump himself — announced them.
First, the reasoning for an operation was to end the drug trade. Prior to the escalation in conflict, it seemed that the focus of the Trump administration’s anti-drug campaign was on fentanyl. However, the primary drug coming out of Venezuela is cocaine.
Later, the White House issued statements that could signal longer-term commitments in Venezuela to restore democracy and control the nation’s oil, as well as oust geopolitical rivals such as Cuba, Iran, China and Russia. The aim of securing oil, however, is the one that President Trump frequently highlights.
When the lecture shifted to U.S. strategy, McKoy explained the differences between “shallow” regime change, which avoids a costly foreign occupation, and “deep” regime change. The latter, while costly and possibly destabilizing to Venezuela and the surrounding region, directly accomplishes the president’s stated goals. For the time being, the administration seems to be satisfied with the “shallow” change of a “decapitation operation,” which seeks to destabilize a group by removing its leadership while avoiding occupation.
“For the time being, I’m kind of relieved, because I’ve had a lot of deep fears about what it would mean for the United States to occupy Venezuela,” McKoy said in the lecture. “The downside is, if there was the aim of restoring democracy, we seem to have, by and large, abandoned that, or at least put that on the back burner.”
During the question-and-answer period, professors expressed skepticism about American oil companies’ willingness to invest in Venezuela. Timothy Taylor, associate professor of politics and international relations, said that the country is “unstable,” having a weak rule of law and “very weak property rights for corporations” related to oil.
Taylor argued that investors may be unwilling to accept the risks associated with conducting business in Venezuela, particularly in the oil industry. This skepticism is shared by the CEOs of several oil companies Trump hopes will invest, despite the administration’s belief that the military action will open a new path for American investment.
Senior international relations major Ailee Viana asked McKoy about how Maduro’s opposition leader, María Corina Machado, has responded to Maduro’s capture. Machado won the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize last October and dedicated it to Trump, and later praised him for his actions against Maduro. To help students understand the reasoning behind Machado’s actions, McKoy offered his signature phrase, quoting the Greek historian Thucydides: “The strong do what they will, the weak suffer what they must.”
When asked whether the military involvement might produce a “rally around the flag” effect, Kristen Garrett, associate professor of political science, said that Trump’s public approval dropped 5% since the operation to capture Maduro. McKoy added that a unifying effect would require American fear. “I do not know any Americans who are afraid of Venezuela,” he said.
Students across grade levels reported that the lecture’s breakdown of geopolitical dynamics was helpful.
“I was happy to see that, so soon into the school year, the IR department had already set up a time to discuss something critical that happened over break,” said Ellie Dishington, a senior studying English writing.
For senior international relations major Alex Mikhail, it was especially important that McKoy highlighted the human costs — the 75 people that the U.S. government reported to be killed in the raid to capture Maduro, and in the coming days, the people of Iran and Cuba, whose economies are particularly reliant on Venezuelan oil. It is notable that Venezuela’s interior minister, Diosdado Cabello, reports the raid’s death toll to be as high as 100 people.
“Regardless of our stances on our opinions on Trump’s actions, we should remember the millions who have already suffered in tense political and economic environments and whose conditions will likely only worsen,” Mikhail said.
