Get your free personalized podcast brief

We scan new podcasts and send you the top 5 insights daily.

By assassinating a foreign leader, the U.S. sets a dangerous international precedent. This action removes the "red line" that previously deterred countries like Russia and China from assassinating leaders in Ukraine and Taiwan, potentially escalating global conflicts.

Related Insights

U.S. foreign policy has moved away from leading the free world towards mimicking the strongman, autocratic behaviors of adversaries. By abandoning democratic allies and adopting aggressive, unilateral actions, the U.S. is now reacting to and copying other global powers rather than setting the international agenda.

While US actions in Latin America may be a direct loss for Russia and China's regional allies, they create a global precedent. A world where great powers feel free to act forcefully in their immediate surroundings is precisely the international order that Russia and China want to establish in Eastern Europe and the Western Pacific.

The U.S. operation to capture Maduro serves as a real-world case study for China's potential 'decapitation' strike against Taiwan. China has already rehearsed such scenarios in mock-ups of Taipei's presidential palace. This event demonstrates the feasibility of a quick, surgical strike, which is more aligned with the CCP's goals than a costly amphibious invasion.

Historically, rising and ruling powers don't stumble into war directly. Instead, their heightened distrust creates a tinderbox where a seemingly minor incident involving a third party (like the assassination in Sarajevo pre-WWI) can escalate uncontrollably into a catastrophic conflict.

While a ground invasion is unlikely, a potential US military strategy involves a direct assassination attempt on Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei. This high-risk decapitation strike aims to destabilize the regime's core, but the effect on the cohesion of its security forces is completely unpredictable.

Soviet leaders who lived through WWII understood the unpredictability of direct conflict and preferred proxy wars. Vladimir Putin, in contrast, has consistently used direct "hot wars"—from Chechnya to Georgia to Ukraine—as a primary tool to consolidate power and boost his domestic popularity.

While the operation occurred in Venezuela, its primary psychological impact may be on Iran. The Iranians are reportedly "terrified," viewing the successful removal of a hostile leader as a direct threat and a plausible preview of future U.S. action against them.

Unlike 20th-century bombing campaigns, modern precision-strike capabilities allow for targeting a country's entire leadership from a distance. This strategy, lacking a plan for subsequent governance, represents a largely untested and rare event in military history.

A U.S. military strike to remove Ayatollah Khamenei is unlikely to help protesters. Analysis suggests it would more likely result in the Revolutionary Guard seizing control or other regime remnants continuing the fight, ultimately failing to satisfy the opposition and potentially worsening the civil conflict.

The recent uptick in global conflicts, from Ukraine to the Caribbean, is not a series of isolated events. It's a direct result of adversaries perceiving American weakness and acting on the historical principle that nations expand their influence until they are met with sufficient counter-force.