Grand Strategy

Usually military operations distinguish between three levels of planning: in descending order, strategy (or strategic), operational, and tactical. There is great glory in being at the tactical level, as it is closest to the fire. Yet the greatest tactical brilliance is not especially likely to succeed without the support of operational planning that gives it the tools it needs; and the best-planned operations are pointless if they do not serve a strategic function. 

Above all this, and not generally included because it is not a military function, is grand strategy. It is just the next level up: the alignment of all the powers of a government in support of its strategic goals. 

I've been thinking about the raid in terms of grand strategy, and I've come to the realization that what appeared to be inexplicable decisions by the Administration actually do serve grand strategic aims. It was possible to kill Maduro instead of capturing him; it was possible to send him to Guantanamo Bay (as indeed he did pass through there). It was possible to take him to Montgomery, Alabama to face charges; instead they took him to the Southern District of New York, which has been the most actively hostile of all districts except possibly DC to Donald Trump. It was perhaps not possible to construct a plausible indictment, but the administration appears to have produced a very weak one. It's likely, because of venue and weakness of the charges, that Maduro will walk. 

But it doesn't matter, does it? He's not going back to being "President of Venezuela." The strategic goal of changing the regime, in one way or another, has been reached already. If he gets a fair hearing in court and is turned loose, he's just some guy. The grand strategic goal of proving that the American system is fair and decent is advanced by that.

The judge chosen to rule over this trial has been repeatedly willing to rule against Trump, both in and out of power. I don't mean to suggest that he is prejudiced; the rulings all look reasonable to me, at least defensible and measured. Trump, by losing in court and turning Maduro loose and unharmed, would actually win a grand strategic victory. It's not like Maduro could plausibly return to power, not with his Cuban bodyguard destroyed: they were the only things keeping him in power, his only security against a coup.

So turn him loose; let the system find that we never plausibly had the authority to do this, and that the US can't reasonably claim jurisdiction. The process is the punishment, we often say when American citizens are ruined by prosecution but found Not Guilty on examination; our strategic aims were already achieved.

That's terrible, in a way; but how does it compare to how China or Russia would deal with a dissident?