featured
CIA Cocaine Trade in Venezuela Complicates TF Outta Maduro’s Charges // Mike Benz
Mike Benz | Trusted Newsmaker
CIA Drug Operations in Venezuela Undermine U.S. Case Against Maduro
The U.S. prosecution of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro on drug trafficking charges is facing renewed scrutiny amid mounting evidence that American intelligence agencies themselves have played a central role in cocaine trafficking operations tied to Venezuela. Former State Department official Mike Benz says this history complicates the legal and moral basis of Washington’s case against Maduro and exposes long-running contradictions in U.S. foreign policy.
Maduro was indicted by the U.S. Justice Department in 2020 on narcotics charges, accused of leading the so-called “Cartel of the Suns,” a group allegedly embedded within Venezuela’s military. But Benz argues that the origins of the cartel trace back to operations directly supported by the CIA decades earlier, creating a situation where U.S. prosecutors may be targeting a structure their own government helped create.
The Cartel of the Suns and CIA Ties
According to Benz, the Cartel of the Suns was formed in the early 1990s by senior Venezuelan military officers who were simultaneously receiving payments from the CIA. These officers were part of U.S.-backed efforts to influence political outcomes in South America during the Cold War and its aftermath. At the time, cocaine trafficking was tolerated, and in some cases facilitated, as a funding mechanism for allied forces and intelligence operations.
In 1993, the arrangement sparked a major scandal when the head of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration resigned in protest. The resignation followed revelations that the CIA had authorized the importation of roughly 1,500 kilograms of cocaine from Venezuela into Miami, bypassing the DEA and allowing the drugs to be sold domestically. Benz says the CIA later worked with the Justice Department to grant immunity to Venezuelan military officials involved in the operation.
A Pattern Repeated Across Decades
The Venezuela case fits a broader historical pattern, Benz argues. During the Afghan war against the Soviet Union and later conflicts in Afghanistan, U.S. intelligence agencies worked with drug-linked warlords, using narcotics revenue to fund insurgent and counterinsurgency operations. In South America, similar strategies were employed across Colombia, Peru, Ecuador, and Venezuela throughout the late 20th century.
These arrangements were justified internally as “stabilization” efforts, a term that encompassed bribing military officers, business leaders, and political actors to maintain pro-U.S. governments. Drug money provided a ready source of untraceable cash. In Afghanistan alone, Benz says the CIA distributed tens of millions of dollars derived from narcotics trafficking to secure loyalty and cooperation.
Why the Maduro Case Is Different
What makes the Maduro prosecution especially fraught is that much of the alleged drug activity predates his presidency and even the rise of Hugo Chávez. Benz notes that several Venezuelan military figures implicated in early trafficking operations were shielded by U.S. authorities during the 1990s, well before Venezuela’s political shift toward socialism. That history raises questions about selective accountability and retroactive blame.
Prosecutors have argued that Maduro, as head of state, must have approved or overseen trafficking conducted by subordinates. Benz counters that the evidence tying Maduro directly to large-scale drug operations is thin and often relies on associations rather than documented orders. He predicts that Maduro’s defense team will highlight the CIA’s past involvement to challenge the credibility of U.S. witnesses and evidence.
The Noriega Precedent
The situation echoes the U.S. prosecution of Panamanian leader Manuel Noriega, who was arrested in 1989 and later convicted on drug charges. During Noriega’s trial, it emerged that he had been on the CIA payroll for more than three decades. While the conviction ultimately stood, the revelations damaged U.S. claims of moral authority and exposed the extent to which Washington had tolerated narcotics trafficking when it served strategic interests.
Benz argues that the Maduro case risks reopening those same wounds. If U.S. courts are forced to confront evidence of CIA involvement in Venezuelan drug networks, the prosecution could become a referendum on American intelligence practices rather than a clean criminal case against a foreign leader.
Legal and Political Fallout
The revelations arrive at a sensitive moment, as the U.S. seeks to justify its actions in Venezuela on legal and ethical grounds. Framing the intervention as a law enforcement operation depends on the credibility of the drug charges. Any suggestion that U.S. agencies enabled or protected similar trafficking in the past weakens that narrative and exposes Washington to accusations of hypocrisy.
Beyond the courtroom, the controversy highlights a deeper issue in U.S. foreign policy. When intelligence agencies rely on criminal networks to advance strategic goals, the line between enforcement and complicity becomes blurred. The Maduro case, Benz argues, forces that contradiction into the open, with consequences that may extend far beyond Venezuela.
