Drug Trafficking: What Links Does President Maduro Have with the Cartel de Los Soles?

For years, the Cartel de Los Soles has become, beyond a judicial case, a rhetorical tool used to justify political, economic, and, since January 3, military interventions against Venezuela. This high-level drug trafficking accusation serves as a convenient pretext to legitimize external pressures that actually aim at other strategic objectives. A Pretext to Regain Control of Venezuelan Resources The American military operation of January 3, 2026, which led to the spectacular capture of Nicolás Maduro and his wife, far exceeds the traditional scope of a simple judicial action. Many observers, including geopolitical analysts, openly denounce that the fight against drugs has been instrumentalized to justify an action aimed at taking control of Venezuela's immense oil reserves and strengthening U.S. influence in the region. President Trump himself hinted that Washington could temporarily exploit and “manage” Venezuela, notably by mobilizing American oil companies to rebuild the country's energy infrastructure, an objective contrary to the logic of a simple anti-drug fight. The Sudden Revision of the Drug-Related Accusation One of the most troubling aspects lies in the indictment itself. The charges against Maduro dated back to 2020 and revolved around the alleged leadership of the Cartel de Los Soles. But a new version, filed after his capture, now indicates that this group is not a structured cartel led by Maduro, but rather a set of corrupt networks within military and political institutions. This unexpected revision highlights a political construct rather than a solid factual basis, reinforcing the idea that the drug trafficking accusation primarily served to justify an intervention. Thus, drugs become an opportune argument rather than a proven reality, strengthening criticisms that the judicial narrative has been shaped according to geopolitical objectives. Juan Orlando Hernández: An Example of Unabashed Hypocrisy While the Trump administration presents its policy as an inflexible fight against drug trafficking, a recent decision revealed a blatant contradiction in this stance. Trump granted a full presidential pardon to former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández, who had been sentenced to 45 years in prison for drug trafficking — notably for having transformed Honduras into a focal point for cocaine trafficking to the United States. This decision outraged anti-drug experts: it suggests that Trump's logic is not judicial consistency or a serious fight against criminal networks, but rather opportunistic political and electoral calculations, depending on whether one is on the right or the left. This reveals a deep political hypocrisy: sanctioning a foreign leader on controversial accusations while pardoning an ally who was convicted undermines the credibility of the accusations against Maduro. Trump: A Strategic Behavior Before, During, and After The operation that led to Maduro's arrest was neither fortuitous nor isolated. In the months preceding the intervention, Trump had intensified pressure on Caracas: threats of strikes, a naval blockade on oil exports, attacks on vessels accused of drug trafficking, and military deployment in the Caribbean and the Pacific. Before the abduction, the American strategy resembled a continuous pressure campaign. Instead of using diplomatic or multilateral means, Washington engaged in a coercive logic, hammering home the idea that Maduro was a “narco-terrorist.” During the operation, the military and spectacular nature of the action — with airstrikes, Maduro's extraction to the United States, and the public announcement of his capture — was presented as a show of force. Trump even declared that the United States was now in control of Venezuela. After the abduction, Trump sought to control the narrative by emphasizing the need to fight drugs, while also revealing other objectives: resource exploitation, increased geopolitical influence, and potential reshaping of the regional order. Internal critics — from American political figures to international organizations — denounced an operation that far exceeded simple anti-drug law enforcement. A Very Convenient Pretext The combination of facts: revision of the legal case against Maduro, pardon for a convicted drug trafficker, political discourse on drugs, and aggressive military actions, reveals an American strategy where the fight against narcotics serves as a rhetorical cover for geopolitical ambitions. It highlights priorities much more focused on access to resources and influence than on justice or security. Ultimately, this hypocrisy is not limited to the Cartel de Los Soles: it extends to all the strategies hidden behind this narrative which, far from being guided by judicial truth, seems to respond to much broader political and economic objectives. Gesly Sinvilier / Le Relief