In the current political environment, foreign policy decisions like military strikes can be driven less by strategic objectives and more by their value as 'memes' or content. The primary goal becomes looking 'cool as fuck' and projecting strength, rather than achieving a tangible outcome.
Under Trump, the primary tool for projecting U.S. power is shifting from economic instruments like tariffs to direct military, intelligence, and cyber capabilities. This "Donroe Doctrine" leverages America's asymmetrical advantages in these areas, especially in its hemisphere, to achieve foreign policy wins without relying on economic coercion.
In the current media landscape, the political impact of military casualties depends on their virality. A non-visual event described in a traditional news article lacks the resonance of a graphic video shared on platforms like TikTok. This creates a grim calculus where policy is only influenced by losses that are visually shocking and widely shared.
Trump's erratic approach isn't random; it's a strategy to create chaos and uncertainty. This keeps adversaries off-balance, allowing him to exploit openings that emerge, much like a disruptive CEO. He is comfortable with instability and uses it as a tool for negotiation and advantage.
The raid on Maduro is presented as an opportunity for special forces units to demonstrate their value to an administration wary of large, troop-intensive occupations. This "surgical strike" model offers a politically palatable alternative to the costly nation-building efforts of the 2000s in Iraq and Afghanistan.
After 1991, without the Soviet Union as a counterbalancing power, US foreign policy shifted from pragmatic containment to an interventionist, 'neocon' crusade. This ideology of a 'responsibility to protect' led to costly, destabilizing 'forever wars' in the Middle East, a departure from the more measured Cold War approach.
Authoritarian leaders who publicly mock or dismiss threats risk triggering a military response driven by personal pride. Venezuelan President Maduro's televised dancing was reportedly perceived by the Trump administration as calling their bluff, demonstrating how avoiding the appearance of being a 'chump' can become a primary motivator for military action.
Much of the public conflict between powerful leaders isn't about substantive policy differences but about ego. The desire to avoid looking weak or like they are capitulating leads to political theater that prevents rational cooperation, even when both sides know the eventual outcome is inevitable.
American military operations often begin with impressive displays of technological and operational excellence, much like a Bond film's opening scene. However, they frequently devolve into confusion and mediocrity due to a lack of coherent long-term strategy, leading to costly and disastrous outcomes.
Constantly declaring "Sputnik moments" for every competitive challenge (like China's 5G or AI progress) has turned the term into a meaningless meme. This overuse desensitizes society and policymakers, making it less likely that they will take the threat seriously and commit to commensurate action.
The US military operation in Venezuela is interpreted as a display of global military dominance aimed at China and Russia. This action suggests a strategic pivot towards becoming a global empire rather than retreating to a regional, isolationist Monroe Doctrine.