For those of you living under a rock, on Jan. 3, the Donald Trump administration carried out a surprise attack on the Venezuelan capital of Caracas, kidnapping head of state Nicolás Maduro and launching strikes that damaged Venezuela’s military infrastructure. Maduro has since been brought to New York City to face federal criminal charges. The operation has, to put it mildly, sparked controversy across the political spectrum. For my part (and probably echoing sentiments of most of the Kenyon community), I am strongly against Trump’s actions in Venezuela. 

Maduro was a dictator. I am in no way trying to defend the legitimacy of his regime, nor am I suggesting that Venezuela would be better off with him in charge. Many people defending Trump’s actions (mostly Republicans) point to the wickedness of Maduro’s actions as justification for our intervention. I agree that Maduro is a wicked man, but, ultimately, it is not the United States’ place to facilitate a regime change in Venezuela, or anywhere else for that matter. 

I won’t waste my breath refuting Trump’s drugs- and oil-based reasonings. I encourage you to read more about that elsewhere. Instead, I’d like to talk about how Trump’s recent endeavors in Venezuela frame interesting questions about our place in the world. For decades, many people across the political spectrum have referred to the U.S. as the “policeman of the world,” insisting it’s our duty to uphold democracy and vanquish any oppressive strongmen. On some level, this makes sense; the U.S. is a pioneer in the field of liberal democracy, we are the economic center of the world and our military innovation is unparalleled. Still, seeing ourselves as the enforcer of international world order is incredibly naive, for two main reasons.

First, the U.S. has been a corrupt policeman. History has proven that the U.S., like any other nation, will prioritize self-interest over any idealistic world peace. In Guatemala, we overthrew a democratically elected government because they were seen as a threat to American interests in the region during the Cold War. America has backed dictatorial figures for various reasons in Cuba, Iran and Pakistan, to name a few. In Cuba and Iran, revolutions against those dictatorships have led to some of the most anti-American regimes in the world. There are dozens more examples of America backing anti-democratic regimes, to the detriment of those living under those states. But I think you get the point: This isn’t the behavior of the world’s beacon of democracy. 

Second, I’m sincerely unconvinced that our fairly ineffective policing of the world is worth the cost of American lives. Whether it’s the hundreds dead in Beirut, thousands in Iraq and Afghanistan or even tens of thousands in Vietnam, Americans dying continents away from American soil for the often-muddy concept of defending democracy seems to accomplish very little. Anyone who supports our vast military operations abroad should be able to explain what young Americans dying in the jungles of Vietnam accomplished. As someone who deeply loves this country and its people, it saddens me to say that these deaths were in vain. 

When I see this operation in Venezuela, I cannot help but draw parallels to these previous disastrous military incursions. Maduro is the new Saddam Hussein, and with Trump discussing deploying troops into Venezuela, it seems like we’re preparing for a new Iraq. I can’t help but dread what the cost of “spreading democracy” will be this time around.

Robbie Gutheil is a political science major from Ossining, NY. He can be reached at guthiel1@kenyon.edu.