Prof. Deniz Ülke Kaynak: “Trump wants to establish a system of loyalty and obedience across the world”

The military operation that began in Venezuela on the night of January 3 turned into an international crisis with the capture of the country’s leader, Maduro, by the United States. Analyzing the developments and the United States’ new world order strategy, Political Scientist Prof. Deniz Ülke Kaynak stated, “We are at a new moment of ‘liberation by the hand of the United States’ in history.”

Emphasizing that Trump wants to establish a system of loyalty and obedience not only in the American continent but across the entire world, Prof. Kaynak said, “Together with his trigger, Israel, they have plunged the world into chaos. Russia is already part of this global mafia-like game. We will see together how China will enter the game and what kind of world the order of the ‘Dons’ will build.”

Dean of the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences at Üsküdar University, Prof. Deniz Ülke Kaynak, evaluated the operation in which the United States announced that it struck civilian and military targets, removed Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores from the country, and in which US President Trump confirmed the decision to prosecute them on charges of ‘narco-terrorism’.

Is Nicolas Maduro the last victim?

Beginning her analysis by asking the question “Is Venezuela a beginning or an end?”, Prof. Kaynak said: “We are at a new moment of ‘liberation by the hand of the United States’ in history. As it appears, one more of the great villains has been neutralized. Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro, taken from his bed in a flawless operation that instilled fear in the enemies of American military and intelligence power, is for now the latest victim. The image of him, dressed in a tracksuit and with his hands cuffed, served to the world media, is pitiful. Undoubtedly, Maduro’s authoritarianism, poor governance, alleged links to narcotics trafficking, and legitimacy have always been controversial in international public opinion. However, it is also a fact that his firm stance against US pressure generated a certain sympathy in global public opinion.”

The capture of a head of state through foreign military intervention

Pointing out that while the capture of a head of state in his own home through a foreign military intervention was criticized by public opinion, reactions at the state level were limited to statements such as “we are concerned”, “we are following with concern”, and “we condemn”, Prof. Kaynak said: “It is not surprising that people turn toward the lesser evil when faced with a greater one. But what about states? Why are they in a relatively silent wait? What happened to diplomacy? Where are international institutions, law, norms, and global ethics? When Isaiah Berlin said that our choices are not between good and evil but between evil and the lesser evil, he meant that concepts like freedom or morality gain meaning not as abstract ideals but within concrete threats and necessities. Therefore, political actors tend to choose not what is right, but what is less destructive. In short, politics does not seek the right choice; it seeks the option that causes less damage, feels safer, and has lower cost, and that option is then constructed as ‘right’.”

Political actors must make rational calculations

Stating that the dynamics of the international relations system are largely shaped in this way, Prof. Kaynak said: “While societies are guided by emotions, political actors must make rational calculations. Considering the historical memory filled with coups, CIA operations, puppet regimes, abductions, executions, and potential economic devastation, the lack of reaction from states without the capacity for retaliation becomes more understandable. Moreover, if you are facing a political mindset that can act without rules and outside norms, analytical approaches gain importance over reactive ones.”

From Bolivar to Maduro

Reminding that Simon Bolivar, the great hero and liberator of not only Venezuela but all of Latin America, wrote in an 1829 letter to British diplomat Patrick Campbell that “The destiny of the United States seems to be to plague America with misery in the name of freedom,” Prof. Kaynak continued: “Bolivar struggled greatly to keep the people of Gran Colombia together after emerging victorious from the war against Spanish colonialism, but he was among the losers. He described his life, which ended as a tired and sick man, with the words ‘I have plowed the sea’. Today, in the entire geography that includes Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, and Panama as separate states, both positive and negative feelings toward the United States coexist. The Trump administration, within the framework of the Monroe Doctrine reshaped with reference to 1823, is once again claiming rights over a broad line extending from Venezuela to Panama. When the Monroe Doctrine was declared, the United States was still a very young state, but its expansionist tendencies were already evident. It viewed the entire American continent as a whole and openly claimed Latin America, which it regarded as its backyard. The term Western Hemisphere, included in the national security strategy defended by Trump since 2017, reflects the spirit of Monroe, but it is not exactly the same.”

The road from Monroe to Donroe

Explaining that Trump’s demands extending northward through Canada and Greenland toward the Arctic region, and southward across the entire Caribbean Sea including Cuba and Mexico, are reflected as strong pressure, Prof. Deniz Ülke Kaynak said: “The border policies shaped through walls and strict migration policies against arrivals from those countries keep the entrance of the United States to those countries open. Since the demand of the uninvited guest is to become the owner of the house itself, this is also supported by military means. The Trump administration sees the entire American basin as an inseparable whole in terms of security, trade, and sea routes. For this reason, the Panama Canal, maritime passages in the Caribbean, and the Gulf of Mexico are designated as vital areas of interest. The deep involvement of China and Russia in the region, especially since the Obama era, is considered a major betrayal. They believe a rapid cleanup is necessary. Some call this new approach Donroe. This concept, defined as Donald’s doctrine, in my opinion carries another meaning as well. As is known, the term Don is used for mafia bosses. Trump is not uncomfortable with being called Don; in fact, he likes it.”

Will China enter the game?

Stating that some changes in the transition from Monroe to Donroe constitute nuances of the overall strategy, Prof. Kaynak concluded: “Monroe was against Europe; Donroe targets China and Russia. Monroe was defensive; Donroe is aggressive. Monroe viewed the American basin as a sphere of influence; Donroe says the ownership of resources should belong to me and I will govern those places. It is clear that Trump wants to establish a system of loyalty and obedience not only in the American continent but across the world. Together with his trigger, Israel, they have plunged the world into chaos. Russia is already part of this global mafia-like game. We will see together how China will enter the game and what kind of world the order of the ‘Dons’ will build.”