Welcome back to Foreign Policy’s Situation Report, our first edition of 2026. We hope you had a restful holiday break, considering we’ve already had at least a month’s worth of news in just the first week of January.
On that note, here’s what’s on tap for the day: Trump wants to turn the U.S. military into his personal global enforcers, protests rock the regime in Iran, and Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro gets a prominent U.S. lawyer.
If 2025 marked a year of norm-busting for how the U.S. military is used (as we covered in multiple newsletters), we’re already looking at a possible obliteration of those norms just days into 2026.
So far this year, U.S. President Donald Trump has used the military to seize Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro after months of strikes on alleged drug boats off the country’s coast, and has since mused about taking similar actions against Cuba, Colombia, Mexico, Iran, and Greenland.
In case you missed it, he also authorized an airstrike on Islamic State militants in Nigeria last month, citing their alleged targeting of Christians in the country, though details of those allegations and of the strikes themselves have been scant. Experts have emphasized that while there is a problem with deadly jihadi extremist violence in Nigeria, it’s often indiscriminate and impacts people across religious lines.
Trump’s oft-repeated 2024 campaign promise of “no new wars” has repeatedly been blown out of the water, and the U.S. president is now calling for a significantly bigger war chest.
“I have determined that, for the Good of our Country, especially in these very troubled and dangerous times, our Military Budget for the year 2027 should not be $1 Trillion Dollars, but rather $1.5 Trillion Dollars,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social on Wednesday. “This will allow us to build the ‘Dream Military’ that we have long been entitled to and, more importantly, that will keep us SAFE and SECURE, regardless of foe,” he added.
Imagined threats. Many of Trump’s justifications for the military actions he’s taken have been based on flimsy evidence or embellished assertions—particularly when it comes to Venezuela. The Trump administration has characterized the country as a major source of deadly drugs being trafficked in the United States—but top experts strongly dispute this. Most of the drugs that the United States is most worried about, such as cocaine and fentanyl, are produced in other countries and travel by land across the U.S. border via Mexico.
While many agree with the administration’s claim that Maduro was an illegitimate and corrupt leader, the Trump administration has also not provided hard evidence to back up the notion that he’s a “narcoterrorist.” In a telling development, the administration in its legal case against Maduro has already abandoned its frequently repeated claim that he heads the “Cartel de los Soles,” which experts have said is a slang term for corrupt officials in Venezuela who’ve accepted drug money and not an actual organization.
Republican reins. Congress has thus far largely eschewed any checks and balances on Trump’s use of the military. But that shifted slightly in the Senate on Thursday, which voted to advance a war powers resolution by Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine to curb Trump from taking further military action in Venezuela without getting permission from Congress first.
The resolution—which five Republican senators joined Democrats in voting for—must still pass in the full Senate, faces an uncertain path in the House, and could ultimately be vetoed by Trump. But it served as a shot across Trump’s bow from lawmakers in his own party. Trump posted on Truth Social that “Republicans should be ashamed” of the five senators who voted to advance the resolution, adding that those senators “should never be elected to office again.”
Even as more Republican lawmakers begin to waver in their support of Trump’s military ambitions, the trickle of congressional dissent and pressure against the administration is likely to become a flood if Democrats take control of the House and Senate in November’s midterm elections. It’s a possibility that Trump is well aware of, telling Republicans on Tuesday that he would “get impeached” if they lose the midterms.
That election is still nearly a year away, however, giving Trump several more months to potentially escalate U.S. military intervention around the world. Given what we’ve seen in the first week of 2026, it is becoming abundantly clear that no country can afford to ignore Trump’s threat of military force—no matter how outlandish it might sound.
Barry Pollack, an experienced lawyer who previously represented WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, will represent Maduro in the criminal case the U.S. Justice Department has brought against him, according to court filings.
The Hoover Building in downtown Washington, D.C.—which served as the FBI’s longtime headquarters until the agency’s current director, Kash Patel, moved it a few blocks away last year—will now be “shut down permanently,” Patel confirmed in a post on X.
What should be high on your radar, if it isn’t already.
‘Hostile rhetoric.’ Dozens have been killed in Iran in recent days amid anti-government protests prompted by frustrations over the country’s floundering economy. The demonstrations, which have reportedly spread to over 100 cities and towns across Iran, have been met with a violent crackdown by security forces.
Iran’s economy has struggled under the weight of crippling sanctions linked to its tensions with the West. Those sanctions tightened following a 12-day war between the country and Israel in June 2025, which culminated with U.S. strikes on three of Iran’s nuclear sites. The protests began in late December as Iran’s rial plunged to a record low against the U.S. dollar.
Trump has threatened to intervene if more protesters are killed, warning Iran that it could be “hit very hard” by the United States. But U.S. involvement could potentially backfire and exacerbate the government’s crackdown while endangering U.S. troops in the region. In a warning seemingly aimed at the United States and Israel, which has also expressed support for the protests, Iran’s army chief on Wednesday said that the country would respond to “hostile rhetoric.”
Ukraine’s security guarantees. Kyiv has been adamant that it needs security guarantees from the United States and Europe to deter future Russian aggression before signing off on any peace deal with Moscow. Progress was made on this front in recent days, but much remains up in the air.
A coalition of Ukraine’s allies met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and U.S. representatives in Paris this week to discuss the matter, releasing a statement that said the coalition stands “ready to commit to a system of politically and legally binding guarantees that will be activated once a ceasefire enters into force.” France and the United Kingdom also signed a declaration of intent to place French and British troops on the ground in Ukraine following a cease-fire. Though the United States didn’t sign onto the coalition statement, it did offer verbal support for security guarantees from the coalition.
Zelensky on Thursday also said a bilateral document for Ukraine’s security guarantees is now ready for finalization with Trump. But in yet another sign of how difficult it will be to reach a deal that both sides in the war will accept, Russia has already thrown cold water on the notion of deploying Western troops to Ukraine—warning it would perceive such forces as a “threat” and therefore as legitimate combat targets.
An onlooker holds a sign that reads “Shame” as members of law enforcement work the scene following a fatal shooting by a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent during federal law enforcement operations in Minneapolis, Minnesota, on Jan. 7. Stephen Maturen/Getty Images
SitRep spoke with Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff on Thursday after the vote on the war powers resolution that he cosponsored with Kaine. Schiff said he was surprised that the vote’s “margin was as strong as it was” but that support for curbing Trump’s war powers has grown among Republicans “because the use of military force has continued to escalate” and the scope of the administration’s goals in Venezuela have become more apparent.
“This began ostensibly as a military campaign against boats that were trafficking narcotics. That never seemed to be a plausible explanation for the massive buildup of military capability in the Caribbean,” Schiff said. “It’s pretty clear this was about oil from the very beginning. If this were a law enforcement operation, as they claim, that was merely designed to be supported by the military to bring a fugitive, Nicolás Maduro, to justice—that would have been the end of it when he showed up in that courtroom. But obviously it isn’t.”
Friday, Jan. 9: The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule on Trump’s power to impose tariffs.
Sunday, Jan. 11: Parliamentary elections are scheduled to begin in Benin.
The second phase of a controversial general election held by Myanmar’s military junta is poised to occur.
Tuesday, Jan. 13: The World Future Energy Summit is set to begin in Abu Dhabi.
Venezuela’s interior ministry on Wednesday said over 100 people were killed in the U.S. raid on the country that resulted in Maduro’s capture. Cuba has also said that 32 of its citizens, who were in Venezuela on behalf of Cuba’s armed forces and interior ministry, were killed during the operation.
At least seven U.S. troops were injured, but none were killed, and five have recovered and returned to duty.
“I feel like we’ve got high school kids playing Risk.”
—Republican Rep. Don Bacon regarding the Trump administration’s threats toward Greenland, describing the administration’s approach as “amateurish.”
Check out John’s report from Turtle Bay this week on the identity crisis and powerlessness of the United Nations in the aftermath of Trump’s Venezuela strikes as the international body tries to reckon with a brazen unilateral military action by its biggest funder and most powerful member.
You should also read Rishi’s essay on the United States pulling back from global cyberdefense at a time when global digital networks are most vulnerable to disruption, leaving other countries concerned about how to fill that gap. It’s part of the cover package for FP’s latest print issue released this week, which looks more broadly at the emergence of a post-American order.
