… like a 10-year old kid with the hottest new Video Game … except this was real

Who’s next?

Doug Anderson

Jan 04, 2026

I can picture it – a dimly lit room at Mar-a-lago, locked doors, numerous large video screens around the walls, with Trump, his senior generals and other minions watching the invasion of Venezuela with giddy anticipation. The extraction was swift and successful – no Americans lost. (But an estimated 40 Venezuelans killed and a lot of damage to infrastructure).

I’m sure the testosterone was flowing at a fever pitch. Even the perp-walk in New York was staged as a victory lap for the TV networks with motorcades, flashing lights and armoured cars.

But that’s the easy part. Now that he’s in New York, the lawyers will have to prosecute him and that’s hardly a slam dunk. Maduro will claim immunity on a number of grounds all of which will be litigated, quite possibly right up to the Supreme Court. And then there’s the need to prove a direct link between Maduro and the drug smugglers he’s accused of ‘managing’ and also separating such actions from ‘official’ acts as President (recall that the US Supreme Court has ruled that President Trump has immunity from prosecution for illegal acts as long as they were carried out as official acts – wouldn’t the same principal apply to the President of another country?)

There is an excellent review of of these and other possible scenarios by Steve Vladeck, a law professor at Georgetown University and editor and author of the Supreme Court newsletter, “One First” https://www.stevevladeck.com/p/200-five-https://substack.cohttps://substack.com/@stephenvladeck/note/p-183374768?utm_source=nhttps://www.stevevladeck.com/p/200-five-questions-about-the-maduro.

The prosecution will play out over at least a couple of years.

In the meantime, what’s next – What does the ‘Peace’ President have in mind for his next adrenalin fix? Columbia? (which is where the cocaine comes from), Cuba? (no drugs, but a sore spot for more than 60 years – and Marco Rubio is a Cuban American with strong ties to the Cuban emigre community). Perhaps Mexico (lots of drugs AND gangs). The US has already deposed and arrested one leader of Panama back in 1989 (Noriega) which in many aspects was a precedent for the Maduro extraction (but Trump has mused about taking back the Canal). There’s also Greenland which would be a pushover, but there are broader (NATO) implications.

At this point, I expect that Trump has abandoned any thoughts of annexing Canada in the short term. He will have realized that Canadians would push back massively, but we’re not out of the woods yet – he still wants our natural resources (and water) and will use economic pressure to try to achieve his goals. Venezuelan oil can replace the need for Alberta crude and he may well turn off Alberta’s tap to squeeze us. And the the recent agreement to remove sanctions on Belarus potash may put some squeeze of Saskatchewan’s exports.

I’m glad that Mark Carney is our Prime Minister right now. No, he hasn’t got any relief from Trump’s tariffs and isn’t really trying to at the moment. He’s concluded that there isn’t any ‘good’ deals to be had until, at least, Trump’s tariffs put the squeeze on American consumers and businesses. By holding his cards close, he is keeping his options open. He is ragging the puck and won’t do a deal until at least after the midterms when Trump is likely to lose his grip on Congress. (Cusma was enacted by Congress and likely would need Congress’ approval to end or modify it.)

So it is likely to be a rough ride for 2026.

(Trade agreements in the US are messy and Trump has been acting ultra vires on most of his ‘deals’ – there is a very detailed Congressional discussion at https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/R47679)

The media expects ‘transparency’ from politicians but that’s not how Carney, an introvert, operates. So we are largely in the dark.

The media have been relentlessly pursuing the narrative that Carney is actually a conservative but I disagree – I would describe him as middle of the road pragmatist – there are many paths to a desired policy outcome and the MOU with Alberta was, in his mind, a pragmatic approach to get Alberta to agree to emission caps. The bitumen pipeline to the West Coast? – even less likely now that Trump is planning to start pumping oil from Venezuela (which is a heavy oil very similar to Alberta’s). There is already a glut of oil on the market and the more there is the lower the price will go. There is no private investor that is going to invest billions into a pipeline across the Rocky Mountains when it can be pumped easily out of Venezuela at tidewater. Alberta just can’t compete.

Besides by the time a pipeline could be built the climate crisis will be such that Trump’s successors, whoever that may be, will have little choice but to dramatically cut back on fossil fuels.

One thing that the US adventure into Venezuela points out is the urgent needs for United Nations reform. The vast majority of countries adhere to accepted standards of international behaviour. The kidnapping of Maduro was a clear violation of the United Nations charter and the UN should be able to sanction the US for doing it. (See my previous article on UN reform.) (It should also have been able to sanction Venezuela for distributing drugs if, in fact, it is determined that that was what they were doing.)

Steve Vladeck concludes his analysis cited above with;

[The US] unquestionably joined the league of ordinary nations—a league in which we’re acting as little more than a bully, and in circumstances in which no obvious principle of self-defense, human rights, or even humantarianism writ large justifies our bellicosity. One can only wonder the price we’ll pay in the long term for stooping to that level.