Multiple explosions occurred in Caracas and other Venezuelan cities early Saturday, Jan. 3, accompanied by military aircraft flyovers. Residents reported shaking windows and smoke rising from strategic locations, including military bases. The Maduro regime denounced the blasts as "extremely grave military aggression" by the United States, alleging an attempt to seize strategic resources. President Nicolás Maduro signed a decree declaring a "State of External Commotion," granting the regime wartime powers. U.S. officials reportedly confirmed to CBS News that President Donald Trump ordered the strikes.
2 months ago
Multiple explosions struck Caracas and other Venezuelan cities early on January 3, 2026, around 2:00 a.m. local time.1 2 4 6
Residents reported intense blasts shaking windows, smoke plumes from military sites like Fuerte Tiuna, La Carlota air base, and others, plus low-flying aircraft.1 2 4
Power outages hit parts of Caracas amid fires in strategic areas.2
President Donald Trump confirmed a "large scale strike" by US forces, capturing Nicolás Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores, who were flown out of Venezuela.2 3 4 5
The operation involved US military and law enforcement, with Trump announcing a Mar-a-Lago press conference at 11 a.m. ET.2 4
Utah Sen. Mike Lee stated no further US action is planned, describing strikes as protective for executing an arrest warrant under presidential authority.3 5
US Attorney General Pam Bondi revealed indictments in New York for Maduro and Cilia Flores on narco-terrorism, cocaine importation, and weapons charges.3 5
Bondi praised the military's "highly successful mission" against the alleged "international narco traffickers."3 5
This follows US labeling Maduro as leader of the "Cartel of the Suns."1 4
The Maduro government decried the blasts as "extremely grave military aggression" by the US to seize resources and force regime change.1 2 4 6
Foreign Minister Yván Gil Pinto announced a "State of External Commotion," invoking UN Charter self-defense and mobilizing citizens and military.1 2 4 5 6
It remains unclear who now commands regime forces post-capture.4
Latin American leaders condemned the strikes: Colombia's Gustavo Petro expressed "deep concern" over risks to civilians.5
Brazil's Lula da Silva called it an "unacceptable" sovereignty violation; Chile's Gabriel Boric urged dialogue; Mexico demanded UN de-escalation.5
The Venezuelan government labeled it a UN Charter breach threatening regional stability.3 5
Bishops' conference president Archbishop Jesús González de Zárate said prelates are praying, monitoring events, and in contact with priests amid rapid developments.5
This follows CEV Christmas warnings of "turbulent reality" and impoverishment, plus regime-Church tensions from disputed 2024 elections and accusations against Cardinal Porras.1 4 6
Analysts predict increased persecution for the Church in 2026.1 4 6
How does Catholic teaching define legitimate war in modern conflicts?
Catholic teaching, as reflected in key documents, underscores that while war is a grave evil to be avoided through all reasonable means, the moral law remains fully binding even amid armed conflict . In modern conflicts, where advanced weaponry amplifies destruction, the Church insists on strict limits: no act can justify indiscriminate devastation of cities, populations, or vast areas, deeming such practices crimes against God and humanity. Legitimate recourse to force, if ever admissible, must honor international agreements, prioritize dialogue, and reject aggression as morally unworthy .
The Catechism of the Catholic Church firmly establishes that armed conflict does not suspend ethical norms. "The Church and human reason both assert the permanent validity of the moral law during armed conflict. 'The mere fact that war has regrettably broken out does not mean that everything becomes licit between the warring parties'". This phrasing acknowledges that war may regrettably occur—implying limited legitimacy under stringent conditions—but categorically forbids any lapse into moral anarchy. Similarly, "The Church and human reason assert the permanent validity of the moral law during armed conflicts. Practices deliberately contrary to the law of nations and to its universal principles are crimes". These principles draw from natural law and Gospel imperatives, binding combatants regardless of circumstances.
In practice, this demands adherence to conventions on humane treatment, such as those protecting wounded soldiers or prisoners, which "must be honoured" and even strengthened. Violations, especially in modern settings with their capacity for mass harm, provoke "severe judgement" from the Church.
Modern warfare poses unique perils due to "atomic, biological, or chemical weapons," which enable "indiscriminate destruction of whole cities or vast areas with their inhabitants"—acts meriting "firm and unequivocal condemnation" as crimes against God and man. The Church prays explicitly for deliverance "From famine, pestilence, and war," highlighting war's inherent evils. This extends to all eras but intensifies today, where technology risks escalating beyond control.
Popes have applied these teachings to contemporary crises, rejecting war as a solution. John Paul II decried the Gulf War's toll, urging "the sacredness of the human person... the force of law; the importance of dialogue and negotiation" as humanity's true weapons. He labeled "war of aggression... unworthy of man; the moral and physical destruction of the enemy or stranger is a crime," with indifference equally culpable. Echoing this, he condemned conflicts like those in the South Atlantic, Iran-Iraq, and Lebanon, affirming that "the scale and horror of modern warfare—whether nuclear or not—makes it totally unacceptable as a means of settling differences".
In addressing Iran, John Paul II stressed religious faith's call to "reverence for man," rejecting armed strife and promoting "dialogue and negotiation". These interventions reveal no endorsement of expansive "legitimate war" but a presumption against it, favoring peaceful resolution.
The sources emphasize restraint over initiation: war's outbreak is "regrettable," its conduct tightly regulated, and its avoidance paramount. While not enumerating full just war criteria (such as legitimate authority, just cause, proportionality, or last resort), they presuppose these implicitly by insisting on law's permanence and condemning excesses . Papal speeches reinforce that aggression and total war fail moral tests, urging leaders to prioritize interdependence, solidarity, and virtue over violence .
In summary, Catholic teaching defines any potential legitimacy narrowly: war, if unavoidable, must conform unyieldingly to moral law, reject indiscriminate harm, and yield to peace efforts. The provided sources prioritize aversion to conflict, fidelity to international norms, and the pursuit of justice through non-violent means, offering a framework profoundly skeptical of modern warfare's compatibility with human dignity.