Earlier this month, our country used military force to extract Venezuelan President Nicolaus Maduro and his wife from their country, toward prosecuting him for drug trafficking. 

This focus on protecting us from Venezuelan cocaine exports has also been the rationale for bombing several small boats presumed to be transporting drugs.

If this is the top priority focus of the Trump Administration’s war on drugs, it reflects an appalling ignorance of the world of illegal drug manufacture and distribution.  

President Trump rightfully identified fentanyl as the worst killer of American users. Fentanyl is synthetic heroin.  The base chemicals used in its production come mostly from China. Mexico buys these chemicals, produces fentanyl and ships it to the U.S.

Can we presume we will be invading China and Mexico, and apprehending their leaders to face trial in the U.S.?

Fentanyl is cheaper than heroin. Afghanistan produces most of the heroin in the world.  It is a significant part of their economy.  We had a military presence in Afghanistan for over 20 years – including Trump’s entire first term in office.  

Why didn’t we stop this production and prosecute those responsible?

Cocaine is a less dangerous drug that has been around a long time. It is primarily produced in Columbia, Bolivia and Peru.  Why didn’t we prioritize these countries for invasion and prosecution of those leaders who permit the cocaine industry?

Venezuela primarily is part of the world distribution network of cocaine (not fentanyl or heroin).  The distribution channel they are a part of serves Europe, not the U.S.  Why did we not focus on countries that are part of the distribution channel to our country?

If we’re so serious about global prosecution of illegal drug producers and traffickers, why did Trump pardon former Honduran President Juan Hernandez?  He was convicted by a U.S. jury of supporting the transport of over 400 tons of cocaine to our country. After he left office, the U.S. requested extradition to face these charges and the Honduran police arrested him and sent him to us.

Another reason Trump offered for our military action in Venezuela was to displace an authoritarian, illegitimate, corrupt leader. Certainly, many Venezuelans are celebrating a chance at a more democratic government.  In Trump’s words, the U.S. would “run the country” and “we’re going to make sure it is run properly.”

If I made my own list of corrupt regimes to displace, it would probably start with China, Russia, Iran and North Korea.  Can we presume these countries are next on the list for the U.S. to install democracy?

Venezuela owns the largest proven oil reserve in the world. Trump has indicated U.S. oil companies will rebuild the oil extraction infrastructure and be paid for that with oil profits. He also wants to control which countries get the oil, starting with a significant amount earmarked for the U.S.

Doesn’t this oil reserve belong to Venezuela, and don’t they get to decide what they pump and who they sell it to?

Venezuela “nationalized” its oil industry over 50 years ago, as many third-world countries have done to manage resources that belong to them. U.S. oil companies lost billions of dollars of infrastructure investment and continue to seek compensation. It remains to be seen if these companies can be convinced to take on the risks of reinvestment.

Trump has resurrected the Monroe Doctrine, claiming the U.S. can intervene throughout the western hemisphere to ensure we are surrounded by friendly countries. What was once created to warn European powers not to mess with us through colonies in Latin and South America, has been utilized by many U.S. presidents since James Monroe to try and control political regimes and economic alliances. 

Rarely has this ended well, and often we have supported corrupt, authoritarian leaders simply because they weren’t communists.

If this is a legitimate rationale, how do we tell China they cannot seize control of Taiwan? How can we tell Russia that Ukraine is not theirs for the taking, or worst, all of the European countries that used to be part of the USSR?

These are legitimate questions. In our country, our government – acting on our behalf – is accountable to us to have good answers for these questions. It is a good act of citizenship to be suspicious of shallow, unconnected soundbite answers that lack factual support – especially when our current president may be the biggest liar we’ve ever elected.

In our world, we don’t get to ask questions in person. That’s why we have legitimate journalists to ask for us. Many of us criticize “the media” because we don’t like what they tell us. They think critically, as we should, and keep asking until they get real answers.  I’m personally grateful for their work.

Unfortunately, I don’t think I’m going to like what they tell us. I fear the real answers to these questions imply negative consequences very few Americans want.