On January 3, 2026, U.S. forces conducted a large-scale military operation in Venezuela, involving strikes on Caracas and the capture of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. They were flown to New York to face U.S. charges related to drug trafficking, weapons smuggling, and narco-terrorism.

The operation, dubbed "Absolute Resolve," resulted in significant casualties (estimates range from 75 to 80 people killed, including civilians and Cuban personnel) and has drawn widespread international condemnation. U.S. President Donald Trump announced the capture, framing it as a step toward restoring democracy and accessing Venezuelan oil resources. Both Russia and China, key allies of the Maduro government, have publicly denounced the action as a violation of international law and an act of imperialism.

Below is a brief on recent articles from top Russian (RT, TASS, Sputnik) and Chinese (Global Times, Xinhua, People's Daily) state-aligned media, reflecting their governments' views. These outlets often echo official positions: Russia emphasizes sovereignty and anti-U.S. rhetoric, while China focuses on non-interference and global stability. I've highlighted key articles published since January 3, 2026, their expressed views on the event, potential future reactions, and an analysis of whether these could prove detrimental to the U.S. from a political-economy perspective.

Russian media views on Maduro's capture

Russian state media has uniformly portrayed the U.S. action as "kidnapping," "abduction," and "banditry," aligning with Moscow's official condemnation at the UN Security Council. The coverage stresses violations of sovereignty, potential global chaos, and historical parallels to U.S. interventions in Latin America. Russia has called for Maduro's immediate release and positioned itself as a defender of international law, though some analyses suggest muted enthusiasm due to Venezuela's unpaid debts to Russia (estimated at $10-15 billion).

Key recent articles: 

RT (January 3-7, 2026):
- "US 'banditry' in Venezuela is harbinger of chaos" (Jan. 6): It describes the raid as "lawless" and a sign of U.S. imperialism, quoting Foreign Ministry officials warning of escalating global tensions.
- "Maduro's kidnapping by the US is 'modern day imperialism'" (Jan. 6): It frames the capture as colonialism, with South African allies echoing Russian views on U.S. overreach.
- "Russia denounces 'lawless' US abduction of Maduro at UN Security Council" (Jan. 3): It reports Russia's UN envoy labeling it a "flagrant violation," demanding release and accountability.

TASS (January 3-8, 2026)
- "Russia calls for immediate release of Maduro and his wife" (Jan. 6): The official statement urges the U.S. to free the couple, calling the operation an "imperial act" that turns America into an "empire."
- "Operation in Venezuela shows that US is turning from republic into empire" (Jan. 8): It analyzes the raid as evidence of U.S. neocolonialism, with estimates of 200 U.S. troops involved and injuries to Maduro.
- "Russia urges to clarify situation with capture of Maduro and his wife" (Jan. 4): It demands transparency, highlighting civilian deaths and Cuban casualties.

Sputnik (January 3-7, 2026)
- "US Attack Not Backed by Anyone, Condemned by Int'l Community" (Jan. 4): It quotes Venezuelan officials and notes global backlash, positioning Russia as part of a united front against U.S. unilateralism.
- "US Strikes on Venezuela Open 'Political Pandora's Box'" (Jan. 5): It warns of uncertain governance in Venezuela post-capture, implying Russia could exploit instability.
- "Nearly 40 EU Lawmakers Urge Commission to Condemn US for Actions in Venezuela" (Jan. 7): It amplifies European criticism, aligning with Russia's call for multilateral condemnation.

These reflect Russia's state view: Strong diplomatic opposition, but analysts note Putin's relative silence, suggesting Moscow sees potential benefits in Maduro's removal (e.g., debt recovery under a new regime).

Chinese media views on Maduro's capture

Chinese state media condemns the U.S. as acting like a "world policeman," violating non-interference principles central to Beijing's foreign policy. Coverage highlights threats to global order, economic investments (China has loaned Venezuela ~$60 billion, much unpaid), and parallels to U.S. actions elsewhere (e.g., Taiwan). China urges de-escalation and Maduro's release, emphasizing stability for its Belt and Road interests in Latin America.

Key recent articles:

Global Times (January 3-7, 2026)
- "US capture of Maduro sparks fear of 'law of the jungle,' but most countries condemn" (Jan. 4): It calls the move a violation of sovereignty, with experts warning of chaos; notes Chinese netizens drawing Taiwan analogies.
 - "US strikes on Venezuela, seizure of Maduro draw widespread condemnation" (Jan. 4): It quotes international protests, framing U.S. as an aggressor threatening peace.
- "Chinese military affairs experts analyze US strikes in Venezuela" (Jan. 4): It details Delta Force involvement, condemns as "forcibly seized," and urges restraint.

Xinhua (January 3-9, 2026)
"Maduro captured, taken out of Venezuela in 'large scale' U.S. strike" (Jan. 3): Factual reporting with condemnation undertones, noting worldwide protests.
"Feature: Maduro decries his abduction as UN meeting slams U.S. intervention" (Jan. 6): Highlights UN alarm and Guterres' call for respect of law.
"Russia urges U.S. to release Maduro, his wife: foreign ministry" (Jan. 4): Echoes allied calls, amplifying anti-U.S. solidarity.

People's Daily (January 3-6, 2026)
- "U.S. strikes on Venezuela draw condemnation, concern" (Jan. 4): Reports global backlash, including from China, as a threat to international norms.
- "Worrying implications follow U.S. military strike on Venezuela" (Jan. 6): Warns of "Pandora's box" for global stability, tying to economic disruptions.
- "Confusion reigns in the U.S. after attack on Venezuela" (Jan. 6): Notes U.S. domestic divisions, implying long-term backlash.
These align with China's official stance: President Xi Jinping warned against major powers acting unilaterally, per state briefings.

Potential future reactions from Russia and China

Russia: Diplomatic protests at the UN and calls for Maduro's release are ongoing, but reactions may remain limited to rhetoric due to the Ukraine war draining resources. Moscow could quietly negotiate with a post-Maduro government for debt repayment or oil deals, potentially reducing support for anti-U.S. governments in Latin America. If tensions escalate, Russia might increase military aid to allies like Cuba or Nicaragua, or disrupt global energy markets by withholding oil exports.

China: Beijing is likely to stick to verbal condemnations and protect its $60+ billion investments through diplomacy with Venezuela's interim leader, Delcy Rodriguez. Future actions could include boosting economic ties with anti-U.S. blocs (e.g., BRICS), accelerating yuan-based oil trades to bypass U.S. sanctions, or using forums like the UN to isolate Washington. Analysts suggest China may limit hard power responses to avoid direct confrontation, focusing on shielding assets.

Will these reactions be detrimental to the U.S. from a political-economy view?

Yes, Russia's and China's responses could harm U.S. interests in the medium to long term, though short-term gains (e.g., Venezuelan oil access) might offset some costs. Politically, the capture reinforces perceptions of U.S. unilateralism, eroding alliances—European lawmakers and the UN have condemned it, potentially weakening NATO cohesion or U.S. influence in Latin America. This could embolden adversaries, with Putin possibly viewing it as a precedent for U.S. actions against him, accelerating anti-Western coalitions.

Economically, Venezuela's instability disrupts global oil supplies (it holds the world's largest reserves), potentially spiking prices if Russia and China retaliate by curbing exports or loans. Russia, despite potential benefits from Maduro's fall (e.g., debt recovery), may weaponize energy amid its Ukraine strains, hurting U.S. consumers and inflation. China, facing a blow to its Latin American investments, could accelerate de-dollarization efforts, shifting oil trades to yuan and challenging U.S. financial dominance. Overall, this risks a stronger Sino-Russian axis, higher commodity volatility, and reduced U.S. leverage in global trade—substantiated by their $200+ billion bilateral trade and joint opposition to U.S. hegemony. While not catastrophic immediately, it could erode U.S. economic soft power over 5-10 years.

Dr Ahmed Moustafa is director and founder of Asia Center for Studies & Translation Egypt 

(The article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily the views of the Tehran Times.)