The US military finally started fighting, the missile hit the target, the third country suffered without cause, and Venezuela was on full combat readiness

On October 3, the roar of missiles from air strikes in the Caribbean cut through the brief tranquility in the Western Hemisphere. In the name of cracking down on "drug trafficking ships", the US military launched a military operation in the waters near Venezuela.

Followed by a strong condemnation by the President of Colombia. The military operation is said to have resulted in civilian casualties and four innocent people killed in the explosion.

On the surface, the “Drug Action” involves the casualties of third-country civilians, the fierce reaction of regional powers and the complicated geopolitical game. Was this military operation that took place at the doorstep of Venezuela's home accidental injury or inevitable as a result of a major country's strategic exploration?

Anti-drug action or strategic deterrence?

The incident happened on October 3rd, when the U.S. military launched a strike on a ship accused of "participating in drug trafficking activities" on the high seas near Venezuela.

According to a subsequent statement issued by Colombia, this operation resulted in the death of four civilians.

The U.S. Southern Command has long carried out maritime patrol and surveillance missions in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific called “International Anti-Drug Operation,” but such a direct use of force, especially in civilian casualties, is relatively rare.

From the logic of the U.S. military action, their official reason is to fight transnational drug smuggling.Venezuela and its surrounding waters are often referred to by the U.S. as one of the important routes to the United States. However, the timing, location and intensity of this operation have to give people some deeper interpretations.

The operation took place in waters close to Venezuela, where the Venezuelan government of Maduro has long been viewed as an adversary by the United States and is subject to severe sanctions.

What needs to be noted is that the operation also caused civilian casualties and quickly triggered a strong protest from Colombia, a major country in the region, indicating that there may be serious problems with the intelligence preparation or decision-making process of the operation, or The U.S. is determined to demonstrate its determination to take unilateral action in the region “based on its position of power” even at a possible diplomatic cost.

So the missile attack may not be a mere law enforcement operation, it can even be seen as a strong demonstration of the U.S. military presence in the region, and it is a fact of “strategic deterrence” under the name of “drog control.”

It alluded to the Venezuelan authorities 'intention to send a clear signal to the Maduro government and other actors in the region that the United States reserves the right to use force in the region if it deems necessary.

But it should be noted that, The consequences of accidentally injuring civilians immediately cast a moral shadow on this "muscle-showing" operation.and triggered an unexpected chain reaction.

second

Maduro's government's crisis response

Although the missile landed on the high seas, the shock wave pointed directly at Venezuela.

After the incident, the Venezuelan government reacted quickly and fiercely. President Maduro immediately declared that the whole country was in a state of combat readiness, the armed forces raised their alert level, and the border and coastal defense systems were on high alert.

This ultra-tough reaction from Venezuela is rooted in the external pressure and insecurity they have long faced.

Since 2019, the United States has not recognised the legitimacy of the Maduro government, imposed a series of harsh economic and financial sanctions, and has publicly supported opposition leader Guaidó.

Venezuela has always accused the United States of attempting military intervention against itself or attempting regime change.Therefore, any U.S. military action at its doorstep, especially as an offensive action that causes casualties, will be interpreted by the Maduro administration as a potential prequel to aggression or deliberate provocation.

Declaring national combat readiness is a political and strategic decision made by the Maduro government based on survival instincts.

This is an effective way to unite the minds of the people, to shift domestic economic and social contradictions. By shaping the crisis atmosphere of the "external enemy now", it is possible to strengthen the support of the people to the current government and to consolidate the legitimacy of rule.

Venezuela used this to clearly draw a "red line" and warn the United States and its potential allies that any further military adventure will face a resolute military response.At the same time, it is also a signal to the international community, especially to partners such as Russia and China, to seek diplomatic and political support.

Although Maduro's government's response seems to be a response to a single incident, it is actually a total explosion of extreme pressure on the United States over the years.It quickly internalizes a conflict outside the border into a crisis of national survival, thus providing legal and moral basis for all internal and external measures that it may take in the future, including domestic mobilization, seeking foreign aid and even regional actions.

three

Latin American geographical pattern or will it be reconstructed?

A crucial variable in this event is the attitude of Colombia.

As a traditional ally of the United States in Latin America, the President of Colombia publicly and severely condemned the death of civilians caused by the actions of the US military. This position is no trivial matter.

This shows to a certain extent that the impact of the incident has transcended the bilateral confrontation between the United States and Venezuela and has begun to tear the regional political landscape. Colombia's condemnation is based on humanitarian concerns about civilian casualties and considerations of maintaining regional stability. Military operations against civilians in adjacent waters are themselves a damage to the regional security environment.

But from a deeper perspective, this also reflects the changes in the political landscape of Latin America in recent years. Left-wing forces have re-emerged in several Latin American countries, and these governments are generally more critical of the traditional interventionist policies of the United States. This open disagreement between Colombia and the United States can, to a certain extent, show that the "one-word" leadership of the United States in the region is declining, and the independent diplomatic tendency of regional countries is increasing.

This could be a potential turning point in Latin America’s geopolitics.

It may intensify the opposition between the anti-American camp and the pro-American camp. Venezuela will undoubtedly use Colombia's condemnation to isolate the United States in an attempt to build a broader anti-American united front. Cuba, Nicaragua and other countries are likely to voice their support for Venezuela.

This also forces regional countries to make difficult choices between neutrality, mediation or siding.Regional powers such as Brazil, Argentina and Mexico will face greater diplomatic pressure.

More importantly, this incident provides an opportunity for further intervention by external powers such as Russia. Russia is an important military and political partner of Venezuela. The tension in Venezuela is likely to provide a reason for Russia to expand its military presence and political influence in Latin America. It may further extend the already complicated arena of great power competition to the "backyard" of the United States.

A U.S. military missile destroyed not only a designated “gift ship” but broke the fragile peace of the Western Hemisphere, exposing the risks of abuse of force under the name of “drug war” in a bloody way, triggering a comprehensive warfare in Venezuela and provoking the rejection of key allies in the region.

I still have to say something, Any attempt to solve problems by unilateral and military means in today’s highly interconnected world often has unpredictable and disastrous consequences.