“This Is About Oil, Not Drugs”: Kamala Harris Slams Maduro Arrest as World Divided Over U.S. Action

The arrest of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife by U.S. forces has triggered sharp political backlash within the United States, with former Vice President Kamala Harris openly accusing President Donald Trump of launching a dangerous and deceptive military operation driven by oil interests rather than law enforcement or democracy.

In a strongly worded post on social media platform X, Harris said the action had “nothing to do with fighting drugs or defending democracy.” Instead, she argued, it was about securing energy interests.

“This operation does not make America safer or stronger,” Harris wrote.

“Forced regime change destabilises entire regions, puts U.S. troops and civilians at risk, and repeats a pattern we have seen before—wars waged in the name of strength that end in chaos, with American families paying the price.”

‘Public Is Being Misled’

Harris further alleged that the American public does not support such military adventures and is being deliberately misled.

She said the operation lacked a clear legal basis, a defined strategy, or any tangible benefit for U.S. national security.

“There is no clear plan, no lawful justification, and no endgame,” she said, warning that unilateral actions of this nature erode international norms and U.S. credibility.

Global Reactions: A Sharply Split World

The unprecedented nighttime military extraction of a sitting president of a sovereign nation—even one militarily far weaker than the United States—has drawn strong and polarised reactions across the globe.

Countries broadly supportive of the U.S. move
Some of Washington’s closest allies and partners in the Western Hemisphere have cautiously welcomed the development, arguing that Maduro’s removal could open the door to political transition in Venezuela.

A few governments aligned with U.S. policy on Latin America have framed the action as a blow against authoritarianism, though several have stopped short of endorsing the military method used.

Countries strongly opposing the operation
Major global powers, including Russia and China, have condemned the operation as a blatant violation of sovereignty and international law, warning that it sets a dangerous precedent.

They argue that if such an action is normalised, no weaker state can feel secure from unilateral military intervention.

Several nations in Latin America have also expressed alarm, stressing that even governments critical of Maduro cannot accept the forcible seizure of a head of state by a foreign power.

Analysts note that memories of past U.S. interventions in the region remain raw, fueling fears of renewed instability.

International institutions and neutral voices
At the United Nations, diplomats from multiple regions have reportedly called for restraint, due process, and an urgent review of the legality of the operation.

While no unified position has yet emerged, there is growing concern that the episode could weaken already fragile global norms around sovereignty and the use of force.

A Precedent With Far-Reaching Consequences

Strategic experts warn that the operation could reshape international relations well beyond Venezuela.

Extracting the president of an independent country through direct military action, critics argue, risks legitimising similar actions by other powerful states elsewhere in the world. Supporters of the move, however, insist it sends a strong message to authoritarian leaders.

As debates intensify in Washington and capitals around the world, one question dominates diplomatic circles: whether this episode will remain an exceptional case—or mark the beginning of a far more volatile global order.

#KamalaHarris #DonaldTrump #NicolasMaduro #Venezuela #USForeignPolicy #OilPolitics #InternationalLaw #RegimeChange #Geopolitics #WorldReaction