Donald Trump’s dramatic seizure of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro was intended to project American resolve and deterrence. Yet far from Washington, in Beijing’s strategic circles, the episode is being read very differently. For China, the operation is less a show of strength than a narrative gift — reinforcing its long-standing argument that the United States invokes international rules selectively, upholding them when convenient and discarding them when power permits. From Taiwan to the South China Sea , Chinese officials believe Washington has handed them valuable diplomatic ammunition.
What the United States did — and why symbolism mattered
On January 3, US forces captured Maduro and transferred him to New York, where he is expected to face drug-trafficking charges. President Donald Trump defended the operation as a law-enforcement action against a “narco-state” threatening regional security. In legalistic terms, Washington framed the move as enforcing domestic indictments rather than waging war.
For China, however, the symbolism mattered more than the legal framing. Maduro was not merely another foreign leader but Beijing’s closest partner in Latin America — an “all-weather” ally nurtured through two decades of loans, oil-for-credit arrangements and strategic coordination. His sudden removal by US forces was interpreted in Beijing less as an isolated act and more as a blunt assertion of unilateral power.
The paradox Beijing sees working in its favour
Chinese analysts describe Trump’s move as a strategic paradox. While the United States sought to demonstrate toughness, the action appears to undercut Washington’s claim to moral leadership. For years, the US has positioned itself as the guardian of a “rules-based international order.” By forcibly seizing a sitting head of state without UN authorisation, Beijing argues, Washington has weakened that claim.
Chinese state media quickly seized the moment. Xinhua portrayed the episode as proof that the so-called rules-based order is, in practice, a hierarchy shaped by US interests. Without naming Washington directly, President Xi Jinping warned against unilateral acts of hegemony that erode international norms — language that resonated strongly across the Global South after the Venezuela episode.
Venezuela and China’s Taiwan narrative
Beijing does not believe the seizure of Maduro alters its immediate military calculus over Taiwan. Decisions on Taiwan remain driven by domestic legitimacy, long-term reunification goals and military preparedness. But diplomatically, the episode is seen as a gift.
For years, Washington has criticised China’s posture around Taiwan and its actions in the South China Sea as violations of international law. Trump’s unilateral action complicates that critique. Even if the situations are legally distinct, the optics matter. Chinese diplomats can now ask a simple question in international forums: how can the US lecture others on sovereignty while forcibly detaining a foreign president?
Beijing is careful not to draw explicit parallels between Venezuela and Taiwan, which it considers an internal matter. Yet the contrast allows China to position itself — at least rhetorically — as a defender of sovereignty and stability, particularly to developing countries wary of Western interventionism.
Why the United Nations matters more than ever
China and Russia have pushed for discussions at the United Nations Security Council on the legality of the US action. The objective is not to restore Maduro, but to challenge the legitimacy of Washington’s conduct.
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has argued that no state should act as global police, judge and executioner. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres ’ warning