Four days after U.S. forces captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro on January 3, 2026, on charges of drug trafficking and human rights violations, a new Áltica poll across nine Latin American countries highlights divides between governments and publics. While leaders like Colombia's Gustavo Petro condemned the operation as a 'kidnapping,' majorities in Colombia (75%) and Chile showed pragmatic support amid border and security concerns.
President Trump, speaking at Mar-a-Lago, justified the action by claiming Venezuela's oil industry—'conceived, designed, financed, and developed by great and magnificent U.S. companies'—had been 'stolen' by the Chávez and Maduro regimes.
The Áltica study revealed stark contrasts: Mexico showed divided opinions (15% undecided), Ecuador high rejection (78% fearing U.S. interventions), and broad public pragmatism despite official anti-interventionism. Mexican polls separately reject U.S. forces against cartels (80% opposed), underscoring sovereignty tensions.
Regionally, the capture pressures allies like Cuba, which relies on Venezuela for oil (via Mexico supplying 44% of its imports). Mexico's Sheinbaum called shipments 'sovereign humanitarian decisions' but reduced them after U.S. visits. Trump has signaled Cuba as the next target, warning of its collapse without Venezuelan support.
Experts describe this as a 'Trump corollary' to the Monroe Doctrine, reasserting U.S. spheres of influence. Venezuela's crisis contextualizes the move: 8 million migrants since 2014, 1,700,000% inflation in 2018, and 18,305 political prisoners. Broader implications loom for the 2026 T-MEC review and Latin America's balancing of pragmatism against intervention fears.
