Trump’s arrest of Maduro: The dying breath of the liberal international order:
If there ever was a refrain that captured public reaction to the second Trump administration, it would be this: “Can they do this?” From slashing funding for USAID, to declaring tariff-based trade war with the world and direct military strikes on Iran, the question has followed nearly every major foreign policy decision. But nothing has provoked it quite like the recent capture and arrest of Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro, who was seized from his own capital and flown to New York to stand trial.
The shock here was not political apathy or ignorance. It was a collective pause, a widespread recognition that something fundamental had shifted. For many watching, this was not just another controversial foreign policy move, but perhaps the clearest sign yet that the liberal international order is no longer quietly eroding, it is openly collapsing.
An order is an organized group of international institutions that help govern the interactions among the member state. The purpose of any order is to outline the different norms and behaviours that are acceptable or that will not be tolerated. The liberal international order was never about a world without power. Instead, it was about a world where power was expected to justify itself. Built in the aftermath of World War II, it rested on the belief that sovereignty mattered, that borders were not to be violated at will, and that the use of force required legal authorisation rather than raw capability.
That even the strongest of states were bound, at least in appearance, by shared rules and institutions and that compliance was beneficial to all. When those rules were broken, they were denied or debated under diplomatic language, it was a dance that only those who followed international politics could understand.
However, what made the arrest of Nicolás Maduro, so destabilising was not just that a rule was violated, but that the violation was carried out so openly, without any serious effort to pretend as though the rule applied.
Trump was very clear about his desire to establish a regional buffer, free from influence from foreign adversarial powers. In the 2025 National Security Strategy document, the American president sets out what he names the “Trump Corollary” as the reassertion of the Monroe Doctrine. Very basically, the Monroe Doctrine is the idea that the Western Hemisphere is the U.S. sphere of influence that European powers (now expanded to states deemed adversarial) should not interfere in the region. In the document, Trump writes:
Our goals for the Western Hemisphere can be summarized as “Enlist and Expand.” We will enlist established friends in the Hemisphere to control migration, stop drug flows, and strengthen stability and security on land and sea. We will expand by cultivating and strengthening new partners while bolstering our own nation’s appeal as the Hemisphere’s economic and security partner of choice.
Venezuela was tightening its embrace with China and Russia, ramping up trade in oil, arms, and technology. The deepening ties rattled Washington, and Trump drove the point home in his National Security Strategy, ostensibly branding Beijing and Moscow as “Non-Hemispheric competitors.”
But there was another motive that made this historic moment feel different. Within hours of Maduro’s capture, Trump boasted that the United States would “run Venezuela”, signalling to the entire world, the desire to put American energy interests at the centre of this territorial breach. By claiming that Venezuela had been “stealing” oil rightfully belonging to the United States, despite it being on sovereign Venezuelan land, Trump made no attempt to hide the true motivations of the operation. This was not about toppling a repressive dictator. This was not about capturing a narco-terrorist or freeing the Venezuelan people. This is, admittedly from the president, about capturing the largest oil reserves and paving the way for American corporations to profit from it.
The open declaration to seize control of Venezuela and its oil production and exports is something U.S. leaders once only whispered about in back rooms and secret memos. In the past, Washington dressed its interventions in grand narratives “weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq, “defending democracy” in Chile, “humanitarian intervention” in Libya. But this time, in Caracas, the mask has slipped. The U.S. is startlingly blunt: the driving force behind its operation is oil.
All of this makes the public’s instinctive reaction of shock and confusion very understandable. Ordinary observers do not need an international relations degree to see that when energy resources are openly tied to military action and economic leverage, the liberal international order has collapsed in favour of a much more obvious: might makes right nature.
Fundamentally however, the clear collapse of the liberal order is especially clear in how the oil leverage logic makes the broader strategic picture more alarming. If the United States can justify unilaterally capturing a sitting head of state and use resource control as a tool for geopolitical leverage, other states with lesser regard for international norms will take heed. Whether it is China with Taiwan and Russia with Ukraine, the lesson becomes clear: if power is all that matters, the ends justify the means.
The arrest of Nicolás Maduro will not be remembered as an isolated act of American overreach. It will be remembered as a moment of clarity. A moment when the language of rules and norms and the reality of power in the international system became impossible to ignore.
The collapse of the liberal international order did not come because of sudden violation of principles; these principles had been violated before. Instead, it collapsed because those violations were no longer disguised. When power ceases to be justified and when sovereignty is conditional, there are few things left in common to guide behaviour. The public’s question of “can they do this?” has already been answered. The more consequential question, however, is what kind of world emerges when the answer is yes, and when nobody feels the need to pretend anymore?
UPDATED: Thirteen pupils killed in Vaal scholar transport vehicle crash:
Thirteen pupils died on Monday in a crash involving a scholar transport vehicle in Vanderbijlpark, south of Johannesburg.
The private minibus taxi transporting learners to about five schools in the area was struck by a truck, causing it to veer off the road. Several other people including the driver were seriously injured and rushed to nearby medical facilities.
The Gauteng department of education said the death toll had risen by one since it had issued an earlier statement reporting 12 deaths.
“A further learner has since succumbed to injuries, bringing the total number of confirmed deaths to 13. All information remains preliminary as investigations continue,” it said.
Gauteng premier Panyaza Lesufi travelled to the scene and described it as a “terrible accident”.
“This sector has been unregulated for quite some time,” he said, adding that he had been in discussions with the minister of transport to strengthen regulations.
“Within the scholar transport system we have some regulations, however within the private transport we have some loopholes and this is the price we are seeing today.”
Gauteng education MEC Matome Chiloane said the learners were from three public schools and two private schools, and included both primary and high school pupils.
“It is really a tragic day for us as a department,” Chiloane said. He noted that, with police assistance, there was reason to believe there was “a case to answer” by the driver.
Chiloane called for greater awareness among parents, urging that “kids should rather arrive later than never” at school.
Police spokesperson Brigadier Mavela Masondo said preliminary information suggested that the minibus taxi was attempting to overtake two vehicles when it collided with a truck.
“We have received information that out of those who were taken to hospital one has passed on,” he said, adding that the minibus driver remains in hospital and the South African Police Service would open a case of culpable homicide.
The Build One South Africa (Bosa) party urged Chiloane to urgently and transparently investigate the circumstances surrounding the accident.
“The provincial government needs to establish whether the vehicle was roadworthy and legal, whether the driver was properly licensed and whether all scholar transport safety regulations were adhered to,” it said in a statement.
“Parents entrust the state and service providers with the safety of their children every single day and deserve that at the very least. This loss demands urgent intervention to strengthen oversight, enforcement, and standards across the scholar transport system.”
The department of basic education said it was ready to provide psychosocial support to affected learners, educators and families, in collaboration with the Gauteng department.
“As investigations into the cause of the accident continue, the minister (Siviwe Gwarube) urges motorists to exercise extreme caution, particularly during peak school transport hours, and reiterates the importance of ensuring the safety and roadworthiness of all vehicles used to transport learners. Further updates will be communicated as information is confirmed,” is said in its own statement.
*This story has been updated with a new death toll and statements from Build One South Africa as well as the national department of education.
Parties demand answers over Iran role in a SANDF naval exercise:
The Democratic Alliance (DA) and ActionSA have called for a formal investigation into the South African National Defence Force (SANDF) following allegations that the navy failed to implement an instruction from President Cyril Ramaphosa barring Iran’s participation in a multinational naval exercise held in False Bay earlier this month.
The naval drill involved the armed forces of South Africa, China and Russia, with Iran reportedly participating and several other countries observing.
These concerns arise from a statement from Defence and Military Veterans Minister Angie Motshekga conceding that the president — in his capacity as commander-in-chief of the SANDF — had issued explicit instructions regarding the conduct of the exercise and that these were “clearly communicated to all parties concerned, agreed upon and meant to be implemented and adhered to as such”.
“The minister has established a board of inquiry to look into the circumstances surrounding the allegations and establish whether the instruction of the president may have been misrepresented and/or ignored as issued to all,” said a statement issued by the department of defence and military veterans.
SANDF spokesperson Siphiwe Dlamini confirmed that the defence force was cooperating with the board of inquiry.
“The SANDF remains subject to the Constitution and the lawful authority of the president and the minister of defence,” Dlamini said, declining further comment while the investigation was underway.
The DA said the defence minister’s statement raised serious concerns about civilian oversight of the military. In a statement, the party said it would seek an urgent briefing to parliament from the minister and senior SANDF leadership.
“The defence minister’s own statement indicates that a presidential instruction was issued and expected to be implemented. Parliament must now establish whether that instruction was complied with and, if not, why,” the DA said, adding that it expected the findings of the board of inquiry to be made public.
ActionSA also called for accountability, saying clarity was required on how the instruction referred to in the defence minister’s statement was handled within the defence establishment.
“If an instruction was issued by the president and communicated as stated by the minister, the public must be assured that it was carried out,” the party said.
Iran’s participation appeared to contradict South Africa’s stated diplomatic position, defence analyst Kobus Marais told news channel eNCA.
Defence policy and defence activities are meant to support foreign policy, not undermine it, Marais said, adding that previous public remarks by senior defence officials signalling closer military cooperation with Iran had not been formally aligned with government policy.
He also questioned attempts to attribute responsibility solely to the chief of the navy. “This exercise operated at a higher level,” he said. “It was a joint operation involving strategic leadership.”
Marais rejected suggestions that South Africa lacked authority because the exercise was organised by China. “South Africa provided the venue and remained part of the organising structure,” he said.
The United States embassy in Pretoria also weighed in, saying in a statement that it noted “with concern and alarm reports that Iranian naval vessels participated in a multinational exercise in South African waters”.
The findings of the board of inquiry are expected to determine whether disciplinary action follows or whether the matter is resolved internally.
Submit and get free exposure here: Showcase Your Business | Advertise Your Special Offers.
