This morning, “President Trump unilaterally launched a regime-change war against Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela,” Conor Friedersdorf writes.
“After Pearl Harbor, Franklin D. Roosevelt addressed Congress and asked it to declare war on Japan. Prior to waging regime-change wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, George W. Bush sought and secured authorizations to use military force,” Friedersdorf continues. “Those presidents asked for permission to conduct hostilities because the supreme law of the land, the Constitution, unambiguously vests the war power in Congress. And Congress voted to authorize force in part because a majority of Americans favored war.”
Trump “may point to the fact that the State Department has branded Maduro the head of a ‘narcoterrorist’ state, and that in 2020 Maduro was indicted in the United States on charges that he oversaw a violent drug cartel,” Friedersdorf continues. “But these accusations and the indictment wouldn’t seem to constitute legal justification.”
“Toppling Maduro is the easy part,” Orlando J. Pérez, the author of “Civil-Military Relations in Post-Conflict Societies,” has warned. Two groups of Colombian militants “operate openly from Venezuelan safe havens, running mining and smuggling routes,” he added. “They would not go quietly.”
“If those challenges are overcome, Trump may lack the leadership qualities necessary for long-term success,” Friedersdorf writes. “He is most ill-suited, I think, to a regime-change war against a country with lucrative natural resources. I fear Trump will try to enrich himself, his family, or his allies, consistent with his lifelong pattern of self-interested behavior.”
“Whether the outcome is ultimately good for Venezuelans, as I hope, or bad, Trump has betrayed Americans,” Friedersdorf argues. “He could have tried to persuade Congress or the public to give him permission to use force. He didn’t bother. He chose war despite polls that found a large majority of Americans opposed it.”
“In 2026, as ever, only Congress can stop endless wars of choice,” Friedersdorf continues at the link. “And if Trump faces no consequences for this one, he may well start another.”
1 Comment
This morning, “President Trump unilaterally launched a regime-change war against Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela,” Conor Friedersdorf writes.
“After Pearl Harbor, Franklin D. Roosevelt addressed Congress and asked it to declare war on Japan. Prior to waging regime-change wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, George W. Bush sought and secured authorizations to use military force,” Friedersdorf continues. “Those presidents asked for permission to conduct hostilities because the supreme law of the land, the Constitution, unambiguously vests the war power in Congress. And Congress voted to authorize force in part because a majority of Americans favored war.”
Trump “may point to the fact that the State Department has branded Maduro the head of a ‘narcoterrorist’ state, and that in 2020 Maduro was indicted in the United States on charges that he oversaw a violent drug cartel,” Friedersdorf continues. “But these accusations and the indictment wouldn’t seem to constitute legal justification.”
“Toppling Maduro is the easy part,” Orlando J. Pérez, the author of “Civil-Military Relations in Post-Conflict Societies,” has warned. Two groups of Colombian militants “operate openly from Venezuelan safe havens, running mining and smuggling routes,” he added. “They would not go quietly.”
“If those challenges are overcome, Trump may lack the leadership qualities necessary for long-term success,” Friedersdorf writes. “He is most ill-suited, I think, to a regime-change war against a country with lucrative natural resources. I fear Trump will try to enrich himself, his family, or his allies, consistent with his lifelong pattern of self-interested behavior.”
“Whether the outcome is ultimately good for Venezuelans, as I hope, or bad, Trump has betrayed Americans,” Friedersdorf argues. “He could have tried to persuade Congress or the public to give him permission to use force. He didn’t bother. He chose war despite polls that found a large majority of Americans opposed it.”
“In 2026, as ever, only Congress can stop endless wars of choice,” Friedersdorf continues at the link. “And if Trump faces no consequences for this one, he may well start another.”
Read more: [https://theatln.tc/c1Blt4D5](https://theatln.tc/c1Blt4D5)
— Evan McMurry, senior editor, audience and engagement, *The Atlantic*