The Department of State formally recognized Venezuela’s “Cartel de los Soles” as a Foreign Terrorist Entity (FTO) this Monday, acting as part of a growing initiative intended to dislodge President Nicolás Maduro from his position. This pronouncement arises in the midst of a continuous endeavor of US bombardments on alleged narcotics vessels, which has resulted in the demise of over 80 individuals, the most substantial accumulation of US military personnel in the Caribbean region in recent memory, coupled with the revelation that President Donald Trump has sanctioned clandestine operations within Venezuela.
This classification of the Cartel de los Soles — an entity the US alleges is overseen by Maduro in conjunction with other leading Venezuelan functionaries and military leaders — “unlocks a plethora of novel avenues for the United States,” affirmed Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth the prior week.
From a judicial vantage, the specifics of these avenues remain ambiguous. FTO classification entails a variety of repercussions, notably economic penalties and visa denials, yet it does not inherently permit armed intervention. Trump has, nevertheless, employed it in such manner historically; during his initial tenure, his administration sparked controversy by identifying Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist syndicate shortly preceding the elimination of its commander, Gen. Qassem Soleimani, via an aerial drone strike. Ergo, interpreting Monday’s measure as establishing the groundwork for military engagements against targets situated on Venezuelan land, or potentially aimed at Maduro himself, given that the classification views him as the foremost “narcoterrorist,” is not implausible.
“The apprehension stems from their apparent manipulation of counterterrorism and counternarcotics measures to disguise a push for governmental overhaul,” Brian Finucane, a past legal consultant for the State Department and present member of the International Crisis Group, communicated to Vox.
Additionally, it serves as another instance of the distinct manner in which this governing body is utilizing the “terrorism” label, a departure from its employment during the era when combating terrorist factions constituted America’s paramount national security objective.
Introducing the updated Conflict against Terror…
The Cartel de los Soles deviates from the conventional characterization of a terrorist organization, even falling short of being a structured “organization” in the strictest sense. This nomenclature is employed by Venezuelans to depict a decentralized web of Venezuelan military officials and regime representatives (“Soles” alluding to the stars adorning generals’ attire) implicated in diverse unlawful undertakings, notably drug peddling.
However, since the day of Inauguration, the administration has practiced a generous definition when applying these classifications. Trump’s Department of State has listed 24 entities as foreign terrorist organizations in the present year – surpassing the total designations made by the US throughout the preceding decade. Those groups identified specifically in 2025 now constitute approximately a third of the comprehensive roster.
Among Trump’s objectives have been four militia groups linked to Iran (counting Yemen’s Houthis, who were previously omitted during the Biden administration), but the majority are Latin American criminal organizations, like Mexican drug cartels, plus gangs native to Haiti, Venezuela, and Ecuador. In the eyes of the administration, these entities fit into the “narcoterrorism” designation, a phrase not new but employed more actively by the existing administration, therefore hazing the distinction between criminal activities and military hazards.
The fatalities and anguish resultant from drug addiction undeniably present a substantial challenge, with foreign criminal entities undoubtedly having a part in the narcotics trade. However, the language from the administration pertaining to which factions are transferring what substances is misrepresentative, and numerous specialists hold that emphasizing merely the global aspect of the opioid crisis may detract from efforts to diminish drug demand. Regardless, groups supplying narcotics to US individuals wrestling with addiction for profit are not as perilous as those arranging violent attacks driven by political or ideological motivations.
Trump’s novel campaign against terrorism is not restricted to the Western Hemisphere: it also branded four European left-leaning extremist cohorts, couching it in the context of confronting “antifa” terrorism. The four entities — hailing from Italy, Germany, and Greece — have been legitimately accused of violent incidents, although their present degree of activity remains unclear. It appears improbable that the German antifa faction, identified as the “Hammer Gang” for assaulting neo-Nazi congregations using hammers, would register as a critical US national security issue under a different executive body.
In the aftermath of the conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s assassination, Trump also labeled America’s antifa as a domestic terrorist entity, irrespective of the absence of such legal classification. Furthermore, the label of antifa is not necessarily a defined organization, instead being an overarching term indicating an ideological leaning.
“We’ve wandered into a legal fantasyland,” Finucane declared.
…Distinct from the preceding Conflict on Terror
One ironic aspect of Trump’s anti-“terrorism” drive is its concurrence with the US’s wider shift away from the post-9/11 Conflict on Terrorism. In retrospect, the level of political relevance afforded to the worldwide battle against organizations such as al-Qaeda and ISIS during Trump’s original ascent to power and in the nascent stages of his initial presidential term feels somewhat distant.
The administration will still occasionally address Jihadist terrorism — specifically when it overlaps with a priority within the culture war, for example the claims regarding Somali inhabitants of Minnesota financing al-Shabaab, or Trump’s declaration to employ armed forces in shielding Nigerian Christians against Boko Haram. But developments like the ISIS revitalization in Syria, as well as details of al-Qaeda inching closer to control over Mali’s capital city, have failed to garner ample focus within Washington presently.
Interestingly, the singular entity Trump extracted from the foreign terrorists roster is the al-Nusra Front, formerly recognized as al-Qaeda’s Syrian adjunct. The long-standing leader of this entity, Ahmed al-Sharaa, is presently Syria’s president, even having met with Trump earlier in the month at the White House. It would have been a difficult scenario to conceive back in 2016 when Trump suggested potential US allegiance with Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, to combat jihadists akin to Sharaa.
The epoch in which “obliterating” the terrorist groups ISIS and al-Qaeda was Trump’s leading objective is a memory of the past. Even still, the US carries on with dropping bombs, and “terrorism” is an operative label for the government to fix onto its opponents, either foreign or domestic, although its modern-day significance lacks precision.
Source: vox.com
