The US military operation that resulted in the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro may give President Donald Trump an immediate political advantage, but it carries the risk of eroding America’s global credibility over the longer term, according to geopolitical expert Ian Bremmer.
Speaking in an interview with India Today TV, Bremmer said the January 3 raid in Caracas is a clear example of what he describes as a “G-Zero world” — a global environment where no single power provides leadership and where the United States itself is stepping away from the international order it once helped create and uphold.
Bremmer argued that Washington’s actions signal a fundamental shift in how it approaches global affairs. He said the United States is effectively rewriting the “rules of the road” by prioritising raw power over shared norms, alliances and international institutions. In his view, this approach reflects a world increasingly governed by force rather than consensus, and he warned that the Venezuela operation is unlikely to be an isolated case.
He stressed that Trump should not be seen as the origin of this transformation, but rather as someone who has accelerated trends that have been building for more than a decade. Bremmer noted that as early as 2012, he had cautioned that the world was moving away from structured leadership frameworks such as the G7 or G20 and toward a vacuum where no country takes responsibility for maintaining global order.
While drawing a distinction between the US action in Venezuela and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Bremmer said the operation still raises uncomfortable questions about America’s claim to defend a rules-based international system. He pointed out that the raid was not discussed in advance with US allies or with Congress, and that it has generated significant opposition both domestically and internationally.
Despite this, Bremmer observed that the global response has been surprisingly restrained. Countries traditionally aligned with Venezuela, including Russia, China and Iran, have taken no concrete action in response, while European allies, though uneasy about broader US foreign policy signals under Trump, have largely avoided open confrontation with Washington. According to Bremmer, this muted reaction underscores the reality of power politics and America’s unmatched capacity to project military force.
Bremmer described the episode as a tactical victory for Trump in the short term, but one that could damage US influence and credibility over time. He argued that the United States has historically benefited more than most countries from stable rules, strong alliances and institutional checks, and that undermining these foundations ultimately weakens America’s own position in the world.
At the same time, he cautioned against assuming that US behaviour will directly encourage countries like Russia or China to pursue aggressive actions elsewhere. In his assessment, such powers act based on their own strategic calculations of risk and opportunity, rather than using US actions as moral justification.
Addressing Trump’s remarks about the United States potentially “running Venezuela,” Bremmer downplayed the idea, noting that the former president often makes sweeping statements without concrete plans behind them. He said there is no indication that Washington intends to install American administrators to govern the country.
Bremmer characterised the situation as “regime roulette,” suggesting that while leadership may change, the underlying power structures could remain largely the same. He said the implicit message from Washington is that any future Venezuelan government will be expected to align with US demands — from cutting ties with Russia and Iran to granting preferential access to oil and mineral resources — but he emphasised that this amounts to an assumption rather than a detailed strategy.
Given Venezuela’s current oil production of roughly 800,000 barrels per day, far below its historical peak, Bremmer said meaningful recovery would require long-term political stability. He warned that major oil companies are unlikely to commit serious capital without confidence that the political environment will remain stable beyond Trump’s limited remaining time in office.
“I wouldn’t rush to trust promises about Venezuelan oil,” Bremmer cautioned, underscoring the uncertainty surrounding both the country’s future leadership and the durability of US policy once Trump leaves office.
