Executive Summary

• Venezuela is in crisis both from an inept government and drug cartels. They have asked Russia and perhaps China for support and assistance.
• The US has three options to deal with Venezuela: continue current operations, deploy more forces and increase attacks, or hit deployments of new capabilities in Venezuela.
• In Nigeria, thousands of people, Muslim and Christian, have been killed by various groups. Nigerian government has been ineffective in establishing the rule of law, and protecting its citizens, both Muslim and Christian, for many years.
• Motivations for violence are religious, scarce resources, communal rivalries, secessionist groups and ethnic conflicts.
• An invasion of Nigeria is unlikely.

What if Russia or China supply air defense equipment to Venezuela?

Venezuela has been in crisis for almost seven years and struggled with authoritarian leaders since Hugo Chavez took control in 1999. On January 10, 2019, Nicolás Maduro illegally claimed the presidency, despite global condemnation of a rigged election. The US claims Maduro manipulated the process and timeline with electoral irregularities including intimidation and voter disenfranchisement as well as improper tabulation of election results.  Participation bans against Venezuela’s most popular political parties and candidates by Maduro have been reinforced by his inner circle. They have imprisoned civic, military, and political leaders and used the distribution of food as a tool for social control. Of the over 30 million people in the country, another seven million have left Venezuela, migrating to nearby countries. The once strong oil sector has been systematically debilitated by government mismanagement and a lack of infrastructure investment.

Control is maintained by layers of military, militia, national guard, and security forces as well as a Navy, Marines, Coast Guard and Air Force. Approximately 400 to 450,000 people serve in various organizations, not including the recently formed national police force of 100,000. The National Guard is responsible for maintaining public order, guarding government installations and prisons, and law enforcement in remote areas.  The Policía Nacional Bolivariana, (PNB) was created by Chavez in 2008 as a “preventative police force,” separate from state and local authority.  The PNBs focus is policing Caracas’ Libertador municipality, patrolling Caracas’ highways, railways, and metro system, and protecting diplomatic missions. The PNB also includes the Special Action Forces (Fuerzas de Acciones Especiales, FAES), a paramilitary unit created by Maduro to bolster internal security after 2017’s anti-government protests; it has been accused of multiple human rights abuses.[1]

The Venezuelan Navy is small, underfunded, and no threat to the US Navy. The Navy’s principal operational warships include two frigates and approximately four ocean-going patrol ships; it also has two attack submarines that are assessed to be non-operational. The Navy’s marine infantry force includes several amphibious or riverine brigades and a special operations brigade. The Air Force is similarly underwhelming.  Once a recipient of US made F-16s in the 1980s, parts embargos because of military coup attempts in 1992 resulted in the government purchasing 24 Sukhoi Su-30s from Russia in 2006.  Recent photos show them carrying Russian Kh-31 “Krypton” anti-ship missiles.[2]  The missile most likely supplied to Venezuela is the A variant, which can be launched from altitude, accelerate to over Mach 3, and strike enemy naval vessels from ranges of approximately 30 nautical miles.  Both the missiles and aircraft are old, and their readiness status is in question. However, a single aircraft that manages to close on US Navy ships in the area could pose a threat.[3]

It appears the US is willing to continue to act against suspected drug shipments and exercise show of force options like the recent B-1 Bomber flight off the Venezuelan coast on October 27. This flight, and the previous two missions were tracked on open-source flight tracking web sites, as the US made no attempt to hide the missions or approaches to the coast. If Russia or China take steps to enhance Venezuelan air defenses and/or offensive capabilities the US could be forced to into a decision.

One decision not likely to be considered will be backing down from the attacks on drug shipments or pulling back from deployments in international waters. With that assumption, the administration can continue current operations, deploy more forces in preparation for increased operational tempo, or strike deployments of new capabilities in Venezuela to pre-emptively defend US troops in the region.

If the decision is made to continue current operations against drug shipments, the additional capabilities of the USS Gerald R. Ford strike group will allow forward deployed forces to defend against any airborne attack from the land. If Venezuelan Air Force Su-30s launch to attack US Naval assets, they will need to close to very short ranges so they can employ their Kh-31 missiles. US Naval aircraft will be deployed to intercept any such attack long before they can reach firing range. If Russia supplies Venezuela with longer range missiles, the situation remains similar, the US Navy will simply increase standoff ranges to ensure defense of any attack. Additional spare parts for Su-30s might make the threat denser, but current estimates are that of the 21-remaining aircraft, only 8 to 10 are operational.  Additional parts might make that number closer to 15, but that will not substantially change the order of battle. It is unclear if Russia is willing to further irritate the Trump administration over Venezuela by supplying parts and weapons.[4]  However, irritating the US seems to be a happy pastime for Putin.

In response to any external support or escalation by Maduro, the US could forward deploy air forces to Puerto Rico and station them at Muniz ANG Base in San Juan. The base can support the mix of fighters, bombers and air refueling tankers necessary for sustained air operations. The initial deployment would be intended to send a clear signal to Maduro that the US will not back down and is willing to commit military forces as necessary to defend our assets as well as threaten strikes to take down any enhanced offensive capabilities.

Conclusion

If the US attack on Iran was a teaching tool, Maduro should not assume the US lacks the will to ensure the safety of US personnel countering drug trafficking. If the US goal is to make Maduro step down as president, attacks on military infrastructure might be a first step, but are unlikely to have any effect except to generate negative feelings in the region and possible condemnation by other nations.  Such an attack would escalate the operation beyond countering narco-trafficking and would be a de-facto declaration of war by the US against Venezuela. This step will be hotly contested by the isolationists in Trump’s inner circle and would clearly come under the War Powers Act of 1973.

If Killings of Christians continue, would the US invade Nigeria?

Texas Senator Ted Cruz is calling on fellow evangelical Christians to convince Congress to designate Nigeria as a violator of religious freedom with claims of “Christian mass murder,” which the government of the West African nation has strongly rejected as false.[5] Nigeria is a secular nation, divided between Muslims (53%) and Christians (45%), with the remaining population practicing African traditional religions and containing more than 250 ethnic groups.  Attacks have occurred for many years against both Christians and Muslim populations, but the reality on the ground is not a simple religious conflict.  While there is clear evidence of attacks motivated by religious differences, other clashes have been between farmers and herders over scarce resources, communal rivalries, secessionist groups and ethnic conflicts. Over the years thousands of people, both Muslim and Christian, have been killed by these various groups.  There are three primary terrorist organizations:  first is Boko Haram; second the Islamic State of Iraq and ash-Sham – West Africa (ISIS-WA) a Boko Haram’s offshoot; as well as Jama’atu Ansarul Muslimina Fi Biladis-Sudan.  Boko Haram has conducted attacks since 2009 against Muslim populations they consider as not being “Muslim enough” as well as against the government and Christians.  Between 2009 and 2023, violence associated with Boko Haram and ISIS-WA has killed an estimated 40,000 people, mostly civilians, and displaced as many as 3 million. Their rationale?  Boko Haram seeks is the abolition of the Nigerian state and its replacement with a Sharia-based theocracy.

Nigerian governments have failed to contain these groups. Government security forces are stretched thin across multiple fronts, particularly in the northeast where the terrorists have significant control. In the north-west, heavily armed criminal gangs – “bandits” – carry out mass kidnappings to expand their numbers (forced conscription) and earn income from ransoms. These raids affect both Muslim and Christian communities. The groups have expanded operations into north-central Nigeria, where there is minimal state presence. “Christians are being killed, we can’t deny the fact that Muslims are [also] being killed,” Danjuma Dickson Auta, a Christian and community leader from Plateau state in the Middle Belt, told Agence France-Presse.  Given the close links between ethnicity and religion, religious competition is interwoven with the other rivalries that dominate Nigerian local politics. These conflicts are economic and social, but most of all religious.  Muslims reject secular law and have introduced shari’a penal law in twelve States. They believe their freedom to practice Islam, including shari’a law, permits the introduction of shari’a at State level. Many Christians support the federal constitution which holds that no state religion be adopted and feel the introduction of shari’a law is unconstitutional because it affects their religious freedom to live without shari’a.[6]

Is there killing in Nigeria? Most assuredly. Is it exclusively Muslims or terrorists against Christians, definitely not.  Religious intolerance and terrorism are growing and threaten Muslims and Christians.  After Senator Cruz’s comments, several senior Nigerian government officials reprimanded the senator for posting on his X account that “Officials in Nigeria are ignoring and even facilitating the mass murder of Christians by Islamist Jihadists.” There is likely some element of truth in the accusations.  Cruz, elected to a third term last year, brought the situation to President Trump’s attention as well, but these are accusations that date back at least 13 years.  In 2012 President Goodluck Jonathan commented that his administration’s efforts to neutralize Boko Haram were being undermined by Boko sympathizers “in his government and security agencies.”[7]

The question remains, what can the US do about the killing in Nigeria?  Trump recently threatened to stop all US aid to Nigeria if its government fails to take steps to stop the killings of Christians. He warned that the proposed intervention would be “fast and vicious,” aimed at eliminating the “Islamic Terrorists” he said were responsible for these atrocities and said he was contemplating military action in Africa’s most populous nation in response to what he claimed was a “mass slaughter” of Christians by Islamist insurgents.[8]

The reality is more difficult.  Nigeria is a nation as large as the area from the east coast through Atlanta to western Kentucky, then to Chicago and then across to New York City.  Deployment of US military forces would not be rapid and may even cause civilian revolt and resistance.  The military capabilities of Nigeria would not present a substantial threat. Once a US force moves north from the two major seaports of Lagos and Port Harcourt along the only three major overland road systems (which are not in good repair and are subject to traffic jams as well as excessive flooding) that force would be under threat of attack from locals, militias, and terrorist groups who have several advantages.  First, they know and would have the support of the local people and environment; second, they can attack at times of their choosing; third, they do not wear uniforms and cannot be distinguished from other citizens and can melt into the population after an attack and hide in plain sight. Gathering intelligence on such groups would be the most limiting factor for any success and would take months, not weeks, for any of the groups and their leadership to be identified and captured or killed. American encampments would be targets, requiring substantial defenses in depth. Movements of heavy vehicles would be restricted by the road system (planning factors of 20 mph would be common). There are 43 airports and airstrips, most in the south but some in the North, where forces might land prior to tackling the road system. Taking over three to five airports (tactical dispersal) and deploying the force necessary from both air and seaports for a search-and-destroy mission would be a long deployment, putting US forces at continued risk. The follow-on actions necessary to find and eliminate the various groups would take months at best and cost billions of dollars.

Conclusion

Consequently, it is unlikely President Trump will order an invasion of Nigeria.  As with most issues, the farther away someone is from the problem, the easier it appears it can be solved. The Nigerian government has been ineffective in establishing the rule of law, and protecting its citizens, both Muslim and Christian, for many years. The US might reconsider stopping aid to the government and in fact increase support and training for Nigerian forces to locate and subdue or eliminate these terrorist groups. Given the president’s recent statements, however, this appears unlikely. Threats against nations are normally taken seriously by both the subject country as well as the international community. Clearly those in the Trump administration are conflicted, with some wanting a more isolationist policy and others aiming to punish perceived enemies for their transgressions.

[1] See:  https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/about/archives/2023/countries/venezuela/#military-and-security

[2] See:  https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/18/americas/venezuela-military-drill-russian-jets-intl-latam

[3] See:  https://www.twz.com/sea/venezuelas-supersonic-anti-ship-missiles-are-a-real-threat-to-american-warships

[4] See:  https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/10/31/russia-venezuela-oil-trump/

[5] See:  https://apnews.com/article/nigeria-christian-killings-claims-ted-cruz-insecurity-e9d2fb7ae02bd3169194fb60872bb3d4

[6] See:  https://jliflc.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/1280143183_PB7___A4.pdf

[7] See:  https://www.cfr.org/blog/government-nigeria-versus-senator-ted-cruz

[8] See:  https://www.cnn.com/2025/11/03/africa/trump-christian-killings-nigeria-intl

Learn more about the author, Advisory Board member and retired U.S. Air Force Major General Michael Snodgrass.