The Current - After Venezuela, how far will Trump go?

Episode Date: January 6, 2026

After the US raid on Venezuela and arrest of its de facto leader Nicolas Maduro, Donald Trump warned a number of other countries that they could be next. Matt Galloway speaks to Janice Stein, founding director of the Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy at the University of Toronto and Jorge Heine, former Chilean cabinet minister and co-author of The Non-Aligned World: Striking Out in an Era of Great Power Competition.

With the Morial app, you can sharpen your French skills in no time. You'll have a blast learning with content from Radio Canada. It's easy as Arndor Trois. Learn French. Have fun. Repeat. Download the free Morial app now. This is a CBC podcast. Hello, I'm Matt Galloway, and this is the current podcast. This is where we live.

And we're not going to allow the Western Hemisphere to be used as a base of operation for our nation's adversaries and competitors and rivals of the United States. The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations gave a forceful defense yesterday of his country's actions in Venezuela. Mike Walts said the U.S. was not occupying that country, but had, in fact, carried out a law enforcement operation. Nicholas Maduro, the country's self-declared president and his wife, Celia Flores, appeared yesterday in a New York courtroom, both pleaded not guilty to charges, including drug trafficking. joining us now to discuss the broader implications of U.S. action in Venezuela is Janice Stein. She's founding director of the Monk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy at the University of Toronto.

Janice, good morning. Good morning to you, Matt. What do you make of how Mike Waltz and the U.S. Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, have explained U.S. actions in Venezuela. They say this is about the enforcement of the law. I think what Marco Rubio and the ambassador, both said, Matt, fits much more closely with a Munro Doctrine, the 200-year-old doctrine, updated by Teddy Roosevelt, and then again now by Donald Trump, in which they effectively say no foreign powers intervene in the Western Hemisphere.

This is our backyard. That's the core of the Munmo Doctrine. It was interpreted differently 200 years ago than these two did yesterday, but that's the core. Donald Trump has been calling this the Donro doctrine, not the Monroe doctrine. What does that mean for other countries in Latin America? If that's the posture that the U.S. is taking, that in some ways they are the ones that determine what unfolds in that part of the world? It's very alarming, Matt. It's alarming because it, in a sense, you know, disposes with a shake of the hand of the notion of sovereign, independent partners in this part of the world who can make their own decisions, make their own decisions not only about their own resources because I think it's a mistake to think this is only about oil, but about the countries elsewhere that they will work with.

This is just as much about China as the largest purchaser of Venezuelan oil, about the involvement of Russia and Cuba and Iran in Venezuela. And that's why I say there's a thread that connects this directly back to what President Monroe said. He was trying to keep imperialists out of this part of the world. that's the irony. Should we be surprised by that? The U.S. last year published its national security strategy. And the strategy in part said that the United States must be preeminent in the Western

hemisphere when it comes to security, when it comes to the U.S. prosperity as well. So should we be surprised that that's what the United States is saying now? You know, when I read that document, Matt, when it was published, all the alarm bells went off. And it's alarming from every perspective. It's alarming because it is this regressive view of history. It's alarming because it deprives all of us, including Canada, because we are part of this neighborhood, of some of the fundamentals of sovereignty.

It's alarming because it legitimates other great powers having solved, you know, the right to shape the fate of their near neighbors in their own backyards, Russia, and, you know, Russia tried when in early moments of the invasion of Ukraine, one of the goals was the decapitation of that regime. He just did it with 200,000 troops and failed, but one of the early goals was to kill Zelensky and his family. And I think we have to be worried about how China is going to see this and what that means for Taiwan in its neighborhood. So this is three big powers make the big decisions.

You know, it's interesting. Donald Trump ran on this platform of America first. He was critical of U.S. attempts to bring regime change to places in Afghanistan and Iraq talked about getting out of the so-called forever wars. So what has changed, do you think? there's no Donald Trump is full of contradictions I think we would all admit but what we've seen Donald Trump do in this Trump 2 version in the first year Matt is he doesn't actually agree to abuse force unless he's persuaded by his officials that the risk of casualties is very low look at how different this is than what other U.S. presidents have done in the past. This was fly in. Make sure that you have the forces in the air to protect the forces that flew in on the ground

for two, two and a half hours. That's all. Fly out. And as far as we know, don't leave any forces, at least not openly on the ground in Venezuela. Compare that with Iraq, night and day. This is the un-Iraq, frankly. And that's, I think, the best way to understand Donald Trump, when he bombed Iran's nuclear installations, he did so only after he was assured

by Israel that all the air and the aircraft defenses were removed, that there was no risk to U.S. come to U.S. fighters. And so are we now back in a world of spheres of influence where the world has been carved up and you have the United States, you have China, you have Russia, and those countries are trying to control the portions of the world that they believe they can have influence over? Yes. The answer is yes. I have been saying, I think you and I may have had this discussion, not that what we call the liberal international order was on its last legs. Well, it has died. There is no more liberal rules-based order. And there's huge consequences for Canada.

Well, I don't talk about Canada, but let's talk about some of the other nations that are particularly in the sites of Donald Trump right now. In his media conference following what happened in Venezuela, he said, for example, the president of Colombia, in his word, should watch his ass. He said, Marco Rubio has been talking about Cuba for decades now. And Marco Rubio said that if he was in government in Cuba, he would be concerned. How seriously do you think leaders in those countries should take those threats? I think those two leaders should be very, very concerned. Let's start with Cuba.

And I start with Cuba because it has been such an obsession with Marco Rubio for his whole professional career. You could argue, Matt, because Marco Rubio was a prime driver here in this, along with Stephen Miller, that when, Let's watch what Donald Trump does with respect to Venezuelan oil. If he continues to blockade the tankers that are taking oil from Venezuela, that blockade can effectively bring Cuba to its knees. Cuba depends for three quarters of its oil on Venezuela.

It's already its economy is in, is inspire only. And if you remove the supply of oil at a favorable price that Venezuela has been providing for the last five years, that could actually push Cuba, the Cuban economy, to the brink. And I think that's exactly what Marco Rubio intends. What about in Colombia? In Colombia, the situation, I think, is very, very different.

And that is, you know, this blanket charge of narco-terrorism, which the Trump administration is using, is a difficult charge to break down and to sustain. We know that Venezuela was not part of that sentinel supply chain. It moved cocaine. And the issue is how much the ruling families in these countries benefit. from the drug trade, and that varies. There certainly is an active drug trade that goes through this part of the world and moves drugs to North America and to Europe. There's no doubt about that. How fundamental that drug trade is to the economies varies by each of these countries.

In Colombia, it's less, but there's no question. There have been threats against the current regime in Colombia for the last several months coming out of Trump administration. What about here in Canada? I mean, we weren't mentioned in his media conference, but Donald Trump has talked extensively about us being, you know, the 51st state. We don't need you, but we might want you and you would be better off being folded into our orbit. What should we be thinking about here? I think Canada has to take this very seriously. You know, Prime Ministers have told us that there is a rupture in the relationship with the United States, that the old relationship is not coming back. I think what we saw over this last weekend should

make every Canadian sit up in their chair and say, what do we do now on an urgent basis to make this country more resilient? Now, concretely, We have to invest more in defense in this country, in Canadian companies. We have to be prepared to defend ourselves and to build a much more robust Canadian military capability than we have. And we have to invest more in our own companies than we have. There has to be a sense of urgency here now. This is not business as usual. Janice, I'm going to let you go, but I mean, how do you want the world to respond?

You mentioned Stephen Miller, Trump senior advisor. Yesterday on CNN in an interview, he said Greenland rightfully belongs to us. How should the world, how should the world respond to something like that? Who's the world, Matt, right now? Okay, just because the world makes it too easy. Who's the world? The democracies are declining every year. There are a group of countries in Europe, Canada, and a few.

you in Asia that will argue that you know there are principles of the UN and the UN Charter that are rules-based that are imperative

but we have to recognize that this is a group of countries that is declining every year and that's why I said to you the liberal order he said and liberal countries liberal democratic countries

have to come together to figure out new ways to protect ourselves together because relying on the world or the international community or the rules-based order or the UN is in plain English not going to cut it in this world. It's great to speak with you as always, Janice. Thank you very much. Thank you, Matt. Janice Stein, founding director of the Monk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy at the University of Toronto.

All right, what are we talking about? A new year means a fresh start. Okay, make a list for the year and take charge of your life in 2026. Look, I'm not talking about your to-do list. I'm talking about your watch list. Cross off Family Feud Canada, St. Pierre, and this hour has 22 minutes. There's no excuses. Dream big people. Enjoy all your favorite shows on CBC TV or stream anytime on CBC Gem. Mike drop. Jorge Hainai is a former Chilean ambassador to both China and India. He is also a former Chilean cabinet minister. He's now a non-resident fellow with the Quincy Institute, co-author of the book, The Non-Aligned World. He is in Chile this morning. Jorge, good morning to you. Good morning.

It's a pretty bleak assessment of the state of the world from Janice Stein. She said the liberal-based order is dead or dying. Do you agree with that? Absolutely. And the extraordinary thing is that the very states that build it up after World War II, the United States and the United Kingdom, have been at the forefront of dismantling it. Mr. Trump, in his first term, and now in a second term, the United Kingdom with Brexit, have proceeded to basically do away with it. And we are all the worse for it. There has been in the response from Latin American leaders mixed reaction to this action by the United States.

There are some who have condemned it very loudly. There are others who have welcomed it. What does that inconsistency tell you about how the United States is currently received in that part of the world? Well, I will say this. There is no doubt that the region is fragmented about this. Some of the leading countries in the region, Brazil, Mexico, Colombia, Chile. have condemned very strongly the attack on Caracas, the capital of 3 million people and the kidnapping of President Manduuro and his wife. Others like Argentina, like Ecuador, amazingly has spoken out

for it. But it's important to put this thing in perspective. There have, of course, been many interventions of the United States in Latin America over the course of history. But this one, this attack on Caracas is the first U.S. military attack on the South American mainland in 200 years. So a threshold has been gone through. We are now in uncharted waters. And you discussed with your earlier guest the possibility of U.S. attacks on Cuba, on Colombia. So we are here in very dangerous territory. Do you think those leaders of those nations should be worried about what could come down the road? They certainly should. And another thing that is very important here to keep in

mind is this, having a democracy in Latin America is no guarantee that you will be spared a U.S. attack. Colombia is a thriving democracy, so is Mexico. Yet, they have been warned by none other than the U.S. president. So again, we have never seen something like this. There have been previous U.S. interventions, but such a brazen attack as the one we saw on Saturday in Venezuela. is breaking new ground. If you take a look at Venezuela, Donald Trump said that the country won't have elections for the next 30 days. Delci Rodriguez is the acting president now.

The U.S. president has also said that the opposition leader, the recent recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, Maria Carino Machado, is unfit to lead. She spoke with Fox News yesterday and said that she hopes to return to that country soon and wants to have a leadership role. What do you predict in terms of the future? I mean, if the United States is dictating the terms, what is the future of Venezuela going to look like in the short period? Yes.

Well, the press conference held by Mr. Trump on Saturday left, you know, more questions than, left us with more questions than answers. There was a certain fairy tale being spun by certain observers that once Mr. Maduro fell or was kidnapped, that there would be, you know, very easy and peaceful transition to democracy and that Ms. Maria Cudino Achado would lead the new government. That, of course, has proved not to be true. I always thought it was quite nonsensical to think that would happen.

What we have had in Venezuela is not really a regime change. We have had a leadership change, and that is very different. Chavismo. still rules in Venezuela. Now, how that will work is anybody's guess? When asked on Saturday, Mr. Trump said, well, the people behind me will do this, meaning Secretary of State Rubio and Secretary of Defense exit. Now, how is this going to work? Are they going to run Venezuela by phone from an office in Washington, D.C.? Again, you know, it's very unclear. We have just about a minute left. What would you, I asked Janice Stein with the response of

the world should be. And she said, who's the world? And in some ways, unpacked that idea that the world is a very different place now. What response would you want to see to what's unfolding right now? Well, I would like to see a response that enforces and that stands up for international law. If we are going to move into a world in which might makes right and military force starts dictating what countries do and don't do, I think we will be in. very serious trouble. That's the last thing we need. Dominance, which is what Mr. Trump wants to enforce in the Western Hemisphere, is something very different from hegemony. And I think it's going to fail. It's not going to work. I don't see using military force by the United States

imposing its will on the 33 countries in Latin America in the Caribbean. We're living in in 2026, not in 1823. But do you see anybody standing up to that, standing up to his idea that they, the United States are in charge of the Western Hemisphere? President Lula, who is the leader of the largest country in Latin America, has stood up very forcefully. He stood up to Mr. Trump on the issue of the 50% tariffs that Mr. Trump imposed on Brazil and faced him down, and Lula won.

So we have been arguing with my colleagues, Ominami and 14, for a policy of what he called active non-alignment in which countries make their own decisions in the global south and put their own interests front and center. And that is very much the way forward. And what happened in Venezuela proves that. Jorge Heine, good to speak with you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Jorge Heine is a former Chilean ambassador to China and India. He's also a former Chilean cabinet minister, now non-resident fellow with the Quincy Institute. For more CBC Podcasts, go to cBC.ca slash podcasts.