By Angelo Giuliano
The escalating tension between the United States and Venezuela resembles a slow-burning fuse. While the rhetoric from Washington is already heated, a full-scale military intervention is not the immediate, inevitable next step. The historical and strategic playbook suggests a different, more insidious progression. The Trump administration is likely in search of a definitive "casus belli"—a justified cause for war—that would allow it to escalate from sanctions and threats to overt, direct military action. The most probable sources of this pretext will be either a calculated retaliation from Caracas or, more alarmingly, a manufactured crisis in the form of a false flag operation.
A false flag operation is defined as an act committed with the intent of disguising the actual source of responsibility and pinning blame on another party. It is a tool of statecraft as old as empire itself, designed to provide the moral and political cover necessary to launch an otherwise unpalatable war. For an administration seen as having a complete disregard for international law, the creation of a compelling narrative is not just a formality; it is a strategic necessity to bridge critical gaps both at home and abroad.
The Need for a Justifying Narrative
Despite its unilateral tendencies, the Trump administration still operates within a framework that requires some form of justification. A manufactured crisis would serve two pivotal audiences. First, on the international stage, it would create a shred of plausible deniability and debate. While international law may be weakened, it is not entirely absent, and a dramatic event—such as an attack on a US vessel or aircraft allegedly by Venezuelan forces—would serve to muddy the waters in forums like the United Nations and among allied nations.
Second, and perhaps more importantly, is the domestic front. American public opinion remains largely skeptical, if not opposed, to another protracted foreign military engagement. Polls have consistently shown that only a minority of the populace, around 30%, supports direct US aggression against Venezuela. An unprovoked invasion would be a hard sell. However, a televised, emotionally charged incident that paints Venezuela as the aggressor could swiftly shift public sentiment, creating a "rally around the flag" effect that temporarily silences political opposition and media scrutiny. The American public, when presented with an image of its forces under attack, has historically been more willing to support a military response.
The Insufficiency of the Current "Narco" Pretext
The current administration's framing of the Venezuelan government as a "narco-state" is a powerful piece of propaganda, but it is likely insufficient to justify the scale of intervention envisioned. The label of "narcotraficantes" effectively demonizes the leadership of Nicolás Maduro, but it provides a weak legal and moral basis for strikes deep inside Venezuelan territory. Anti-drug operations are typically conducted in cooperation with host nations or involve limited, targeted actions. Using this premise to justify a full decapitation strike against a sovereign government, the bombing of military facilities, or the destruction of critical national infrastructure would be a dramatic and transparent escalation that many would see for what it is: an act of war under a thin guise.
A false flag event would therefore be the catalyst required to transform the "war on drugs" into a "war of defense." It would reframe the narrative from the US as an aggressor pursuing regime change to the US as a victim responding to an unprovoked attack.
The Endgame: Justifying the Unjustifiable
The ultimate goals of the Trump administration appear to extend far beyond a simple change in leadership. The objectives, as evidenced by rhetoric and military planning, include the decapitation of the democratically elected President Maduro, strategic strikes on Venezuelan military facilities to cripple its defense capabilities, and the targeting of critical infrastructure inextricably linked to the nation's oil production. The final, and most devastating, outcome would be the destruction of Venezuela's already crippled economy, paving the way for a wholesale restructuring under a puppet government friendly to US interests.
It is profoundly difficult to justify such a comprehensive assault on a sovereign nation under current international norms. To openly admit to these goals would be to admit to a war of aggression. Therefore, the administration requires a spark—a moment of controlled, manufactured chaos that allows it to pursue this maximalist agenda under the banner of necessity and self-defense. The world must watch Venezuela with a critical eye, looking not only at the actions of the Maduro government but also at any suspicious incident that could be used as the pretext for a long-planned intervention. In the high-stakes game of geopolitics, the most dangerous attacks are often the ones designed to look like they came from someone else.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.
Read more articles by Angelo Giuliano:
Opinion | The Empire's puppet strings: Soros NGOs as USAID, NED, and CIA fronts
Comment