Slide 1 — Title & Focus
This presentation analyzes U.S. foreign policy toward Venezuela after the capture of Nicolás
Maduro using the theory of Neoclassical Realism. The main focus is how U.S. national
interest shaped policy after January 3, 2026. The analysis works at three levels: systemic
(international structure), domestic (internal politics and institutions), and individual
(leadership beliefs). It explains how power politics, internal pressures, and leader perceptions
combine to produce foreign policy decisions. The approach follows a Foreign Policy
Analysis framework and relies on documented events and official statements.
Slide 2 — Background of Event
Nicolás Maduro was captured on January 3, 2026, by U.S. special forces in an operation
called “Operation Absolute Resolve.” After capture, he was transferred to U.S. custody and
formally indicted. The charges included narco-terrorism and drug trafficking conspiracy. The
United States had earlier announced a bounty of up to $50 million for him. This event marked
a shift in U.S. strategy from mainly sanctions and pressure to direct intervention. It also
signaled the beginning of a transition-focused U.S. policy toward Venezuela.
Slide 3 — Neoclassical Realism (Theory)
Neoclassical Realism assumes that the international system is anarchic, meaning there is no
central global authority above states. Because of this, states try to secure power and ensure
survival. Systemic pressures from the global balance of power influence state choices, but
these pressures do not act alone. Domestic politics, institutions, and internal conditions filter
how leaders respond. Decision-makers’ perceptions and beliefs also matter. Foreign policy is
therefore not only a result of external threats but also of domestic structures and individual
leadership variables.
Slide 4 — U.S. National Interests
The data highlights several U.S. national interests in Venezuela. Energy security is central,
since Venezuela holds about 303 billion barrels of oil reserves. Counternarcotics goals and
cartel disruption are also key concerns. Migration control is important due to the regional
displacement crisis. The U.S. also seeks regional stability in the Western Hemisphere and
wants to limit the influence of China, Russia, and Iran there. Another objective is to promote
market-oriented economic restructuring in Venezuela to align with U.S. economic and
strategic preferences.
Slide 5 — Systemic Level Factors
At the systemic level, U.S. behaviorr is explained through balance-of-power logic and
hemispheric dominance concerns. Venezuela had reportedly received over $60 billion in
loans and military support from China and Russia since 2013, which raised U.S. strategic
worries. Cocaine transit flows through Venezuela were estimated above 200 metric tons per
year and described as a transnational security threat. U.S. strikes and oil controls are
presented as power-maximizing moves in an anarchic system, aimed at reducing adversarial
influence in the Western Hemisphere.
Slide 6 — Domestic Level Factors
fp presentaton
Domestic factors inside the United States also shaped policy choices. There was
congressional debate over security operations, with bipartisan concern about
counternarcotics. U.S. energy firms supported greater oil access and expected a possible
output increase of about 500,000 barrels per day. Migration pressure from Venezuela’s crisis
influenced policy discussions, with more than 7 million people displaced since 2015.
Bureaucratic actors and institutions played a role in how the policy was executed and
implemented.
Slide 7 — Individual Level Factors
fp presentaton
At the individual level, leadership beliefs and perceptions influenced decisions. The slide
states that Trump favored decisive and unilateral action and framed the capture as a security
victory. He emphasized direct transition control, and the increased bounty signaled strong
resolve. Rubio linked the Venezuelan regime with narco-terror networks. These elite
perceptions and leadership preferences accelerated policy action and shaped the final strategy
toward Venezuela.
Slide 8 — Integrated Conclusion
fp presentaton
The conclusion integrates all three levels. Systemic threats created incentives for action,
while domestic interests filtered which priorities were emphasized. Leadership perceptions
determined the timing and scale of the response. U.S. policy after the capture combined
security, energy, and geopolitical objectives. Overall, the case fits the neoclassical realist
model because it shows that foreign policy is driven by international pressures, domestic
filters, and individual leadership choices together.
