Opinion: The US strikes Venezuela, Consequences for Ukraine and Europe

This is a Flash Analysis published on 3 January 2026 by the European Policy Centre in Brussels. Chris Kremidas-Courtney is a Senior Visiting Fellow at the European Policy Centre.

As 2026 barely takes its first breath, we are already drifting back into an age where great powers manage their own neighbourhoods and look away from everyone else’s. It’s a world order that prizes control over legitimacy and stability over justice until neither one survives.

The most immediate consequence of the US strike on Venezuela may be felt not in Latin America, but first in Ukraine. As foreshadowed in the Trump administration’s National Security Strategy, Washington is intent on rooting its power firmly in the Western Hemisphere while potentially leaving Russia and China greater freedom of action in their ‘backyards’.

Seen through this lens, the strike on Venezuela looks more like part of a broader reversion to regional spheres of influence. The emerging message is that the United States will enforce primacy close to home but its willingness to underwrite security beyond its hemisphere is increasingly transactional and politically fragile. This is a 21st-century version of the 1823 Monroe Doctrine, in which US hemispheric dominance was paired with strategic disengagement from Europe’s wars. It is also the world Putin has long argued for.

It is hard to see an upside for Europe, but there may be one small silver lining. Prior to the strike, Caracas had been demonstrating how a sanctioned regime could survive and adapt by embedding itself into alternative economic and financial networks backed by China, Russia and Iran. That resilience was undermining the credibility of sanctions as a systemic tool, on which the EU relies far more heavily than the United States. By decapitating the Maduro regime, Washington has reasserted that sanctions are not an end state, but a step on an escalation ladder that can still culminate in the use of force.

Yet this restoration of the credibility of sanctions comes at a great cost. It risks signalling to other revisionist or embattled regimes that force is the ultimate arbiter. All eyes are now on Moscow, since, as former US National Security Council official Fiona Hill testified in 2019, Russia had informally offered to end its support for Venezuela in exchange for US acquiescence on Ukraine.  Meanwhile, online advocates in China are calling on their regime to emulate the US and take similar steps against Taiwan.

Worse still, Venezuela is now politically hollowed out. Any opposition figure who emerges now could be instantly labelled a US proxy. It is not yet clear what the thinking is in Washington about the day after, but the precedents of Iraq and Afghanistan are not encouraging.

Once again, Washington has demonstrated its ability to act decisively – but also reminded us of its lack of staying power. For Ukraine, that distinction may prove fatal unless Europe can step up and support Kyiv more decisively in 2026.

Source: This is a Flash Analysis published on 3 January 2026 by the European Policy Centre in Brussels. Chris Kremidas-Courtney is a Senior Visiting Fellow at the European Policy Centre.

Photo: Nikolas Maduro (archive picture).

 

The views expressed in opinion pieces and commentaries do not necessarily reflect the position of commonspace.eu or its partners

 

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Key European countries back Denmark in the face of Trump's continuing insistence on taking over Greenland

Key European countries back Denmark in the face of Trump's continuing insistence on taking over Greenland

 Six major European countries have declared their support to Denmark following renewed insistence by the US that it must have control over Greenland. "Greenland belongs to its people, and only Denmark and Greenland can decide on matters concerning their relations," said the leaders of the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and Spain, in a joint statement, issued on Tuesday (6 January), together with Denmark. On Sunday, Donald Trump said the US "needed" Greenland - a semi-autonomous region of fellow Nato member Denmark - for security reasons. He has refused to rule out the use of force to take control of the territory, and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned on Monday that an attack by the US would spell the end of Nato. The issue of Greenland's future resurfaced in the wake of the US military intervention in Venezuela, during which elite troops went in to seize the country's President Nicolás Maduro and take him to face drugs and weapons charges in New York. Following the raid, Trump said the US would "run" Venezuela for an unspecified period of time. He also said the US was returning to an 1823 policy of US supremacy in its sphere of influence in the Western hemisphere - and he warned a number of countries the US could turn its attention to them. The US military raid in Venezuela has reignited fears that the US may consider using force to secure control of Greenland. A day after the raid, Katie Miller - the wife of one of Trump's senior aides - posted on social media a map of Greenland in the colours of the American flag, alongside the word "SOON". On Monday, her husband Stephen Miller said it was "the formal position of the US government that Greenland should be part of the US". In an interview with CNN, he also said the US "is the power of Nato. For the US to secure the Arctic region, to protect and defend Nato and Nato interests, obviously Greenland should be part of the US." Asked repeatedly whether the US would rule out using force to annex it, Miller responded: "Nobody's going to fight the US over the future of Greenland." Stressing they were as keen as the US in Arctic security, the seven European signatories of Tuesday's joint statement said this must be achieved by Nato allies, including the US "collectively" - whilst "upholding the principles of the UN Charter, including sovereignty, territorial integrity and the inviolability of borders". Greenland's Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen welcomed the statement and called for "respectful dialogue". "The dialogue must take place with respect for the fact that Greenland's status is rooted in international law and the principle of territorial integrity," Nielsen said. Trump has claimed that making Greenland part of the US would serve American security interests due to its strategic location and its abundance of minerals critical to high-tech sectors. Greenland, which has a population of 57,000 people, has had extensive self-government since 1979, though defence and foreign policy remain in Danish hands. While most Greenlanders favour eventual independence from Denmark, opinion polls show overwhelming opposition to becoming part of the US.

Popular