‘Remote coercion’: What Has US Approach Been Since Abduction of Maduro?

In the three weeks since the United States conducted a military operation that resulted in the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, Washington’s strategy toward Venezuela has taken shape — but not along the lines of a fully coherent policy. Instead, analysts describe what is unfolding as a form of “remote coercion,” where the US applies pressure without establishing direct governance in Caracas.

Maduro has been held in New York since his arrest on drug-trafficking and “narcoterrorism” charges following the January 3 operation, which also drew immediate international criticism for violating Venezuela’s sovereignty.

Since then, a significant portion of the US military remains deployed off the Venezuelan coast, alongside a blockade of sanctioned oil tankers. The Trump administration has not ruled out further strikes against what it calls drug smuggling activity in the Caribbean, and has made clear that access to Venezuelan oil is central to its objectives.

Rather than projecting a full governing plan, senior policymakers have focused on economic and strategic leverage. US officials say steps taken so far are intended to maintain pressure on the post-Maduro leadership while extracting concessions around resource access. Analysts argue this amounts to coercive leverage — using sanctions, oil market influence, and the implicit threat of force to shape Venezuelan decision-making without assuming administrative responsibility.

Venezuela’s acting president, Delcy Rodríguez, initially condemned the US raid as illegal but has since adopted a more cooperative tone, including exploring oil exports and economic interaction with Washington. However, experts warn that this compliance may reflect pressure rather than genuine alignment, and could shift if internal political or military fault lines change.

Internationally, the operation sparked broad debate. Some US allies offered cautious support, while many Latin American, African, and Asian nations condemned the action as a violation of international law.

For now, the US approach since Maduro’s abduction appears to be a blend of deterrence and inducement: maintaining influence over key Venezuelan assets and policies without committing to long-term nation-building or clear diplomatic frameworks.

For more such articles, please follow us on LinkedIn and Instagram.