US Officials Accused Venezuela of Narco-Terrorism. Then Quietly Did Business.
The Independent meticulously details how Trump's claims of Venezuelan 'narco-terrorism' led to civilian deaths, framing it as a truth-finding mission. What the article sidelines, however, is the long, sordid history of Washington using the 'drug war' as a pretext for destabilizing governments it dislikes. Venezuela's government has been a target for regime change orchestrated by elements within
the US State Department and intelligence agencies for years. (Recall the 2002 coup attempt against Hugo Chávez, quietly supported by the US archives, or the US sanctions that have crippled their economy.) So, while Trump pointed fingers and the media dutifully reported his accusations, one wonders if the true 'narco-terrorist' framework isn't the policy that creates desperation, then demonizes the
victims of that desperation. It appears the US government is quite adept at prosecuting 'narco-terrorists' when it serves a geopolitical agenda, yet struggles to identify the underlying causes—or their own complicity in them. The US has a long history of backing regimes and individuals with documented drug ties when it suits their interests, from Central America to Afghanistan. This '$50 million
bounty for Maduro' narrative, as The Independent points out, smells less of genuine concern for drug trafficking and more of a classic intelligence playbook for regime destabilization.