Today’s Venezuela will have a long and unpredictable road to travel before it can escape the shadow of the Noriega era. Operation Absolute Resolve will either bring the United States to the summit of hegemony or act as a fuse that ignites the collapse of the rules-based global order.

Trump cannot easily replicate his muscular intervention in South America because conditions are far different. But the methods that appeared effective in Venezuela are ill-suited to a territory that is deeply embedded in alliance politics and the international legal order.

Many countries in the North appear to be justifying the action by the U.S., while most in the South are condemning it. It is especially important now that political leaders be aware of the true aspirations and hardships of their people and address them urgently before these can escalate into dissent.

The U.S. operation to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro demonstrates Washington’s military power and intent to counter rival influence, particularly China, in the Western Hemisphere, but it violates international law and risks destabilizing the region. Such interventions often produce unintended consequences, embolden other powers to challenge norms, and expose smaller states to coercion, highlighting the dangers of unilateral actions under the guise of national or hemispheric security.

Is the United States engaging in retrenchment or a new form of hegemony? Venezuela and Greenland are not separate stories but a single thread. A more transactional, more emotional and more coercion-oriented U.S. is taking shape.

The cases of Greenland, Venezuela and Ukraine signal what’s coming in the next phase of global governance. It is not disappearing but is being rebuilt—faster, more contested and more deal-driven than ever under the pressure of crisis and rivalry.

The most important question stemming from America’s intervention in Venezuela is not whether it violated international law and norms, but what it reveals about the future of the liberal international order. Contrary to what some commentators say, that order is not collapsing, since its core pillars remain in place and the alternatives to them are still weak. But sustaining it will now involve more frequent discretionary US actions, and it will become increasingly unclear where the thresholds for future interventions lie.

When lawless behavior by powerful nations can be carried out with virtual impunity—with no significant international opposition—a civilized world order founded on rules rather than brute force can no longer be guaranteed.

The U.S. kidnapping of President Maduro represents one of the worst violations of international law by a major power in decades. It also reflects the role of Venezuela as a battleground of U.S. and Chinese interests.

For China-U.S. relations today, the realistic question is not how to construct a G2 but how the two countries can find a workable mode of coexistence under conditions in which cooperation and competition can coexist.