Opinion: After Maduro

Authoritarian regimes do not usually collapse in unison, but they lean on the same structural architecture: extreme centralization of power, a repressive apparatus, propaganda, and the illusion of a permanent confrontation with an “external enemy.” While Nicolás Maduro and Vladimir Putin are not identical figures, they belong to the same political ecosystem.

The detention of Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro by the United States and his appearance before American justice in January 2026 is a historic precedent whose impact extends far beyond Latin America. This event shatters the primary myth of autocrats: that the usurpation of internal power is a guarantee of external invulnerability.

Maduro and the end of illusions

For years, Venezuela served as a classic example of authoritarian degradation, a resource-rich country hollowed out by corruption, repression, and economic collapse. Maduro’s survival was predicated on the loyalty of the military and a system designed not for governance, but solely for the destruction of opponents.

His forced removal from power is a signal to all other dictators: the guarantee of personal safety is now increasingly tenuous. The physical extraction of a dictator from his country by an external force – as opposed to outright liquidation – is a psychological barrier that was previously considered an unbreachable “red line.”

Putin’s Russia: war as a survival mechanism

Vladimir Putin’s Russia has been transformed into a “state at war.” The invasion of Ukraine is no longer just foreign policy; it is the backbone of domestic control. Mobilization, censorship, and repression are justified through the logic of permanent conflict.

However, history teaches us that prolonged wars exhaust authoritarian systems from within. Economic fatigue, battlefield losses, and sanctions create fractures within the ruling elite. The Maduro precedent carries a devastating resonance for Moscow, as it demonstrates that leaders linked to international crimes no longer possess a safety net.

The question – “After Maduro, Putin?” – does not imply a mechanical sequence of events. The Russian system is larger and more resilient, yet it shares the same vulnerabilities. Maduro’s detention has introduced a corrosive doubt into systems built on the myth of “invincibility.”

The Maduro case confirms that the era of impunity for dictators is coming to an end.

“The Feast of the Goat” and the anatomy of tyranny

The erosion of authoritarian systems finds a profound literary parallel in Mario Vargas Llosa’s masterpiece, “The Feast of the Goat” (La Fiesta del Chivo). The novel chronicles the final days of Rafael Trujillo’s dictatorship in the Dominican Republic, offering a clinical look at the mechanisms of power that sustain – and ultimately destroy – autocrats like Maduro or Putin.

Trujillo, much like Maduro or Putin, equated his physical person with the state itself. Llosa’s novel demonstrates that a dictatorship relies not on genuine popular support, but on the collective psychological conviction that the “Chief” is untouchable. The arrest of Maduro and his appearance before a US court shatters this “divine” aura. It proves that the transition from “Supreme Leader” to “Prisoner” is a matter of circumstance, not impossibility.

As the novel illustrates, a ruling elite is often hollowed out by constant humiliation and fear. The Russian elite is no exception. Loyalty in such regimes is purely transactional. When the “external enemy” or international justice finally breaches the wall of impunity, the inner circle’s fear of the dictator is replaced by the fear of sinking with the ship.

The views expressed in this opinion article are the author’s and not necessarily those of Kyiv Post.