The Napoleonic Shadow of Trump’s Foreign Policy
In military history, the line between a masterstroke and a catastrophe is often defined by the failure to recognise when a short, victorious war has evolved into an existential quagmire. The trajectory of Trump’s foreign policy this year reflects precisely this dynamic. While the decapitation of the Maduro government initially appeared to validate the administration’s “Maximum Pressure” doctrine, the ongoing air war with Iran increasingly resembles a Napoleonic Moscow moment - a high-stakes gamble in which overwhelming kinetic force has failed to overcome geographic and ideological depth.
The Venezuelan “Austerlitz”
The capture of Nicolás Maduro on 3 January 2026 was, in tactical terms, a historically significant and highly impressive decapitation strike. Operation Absolute Resolve achieved its immediate objective within hours, removing the head of the Venezuelan state and, in theory, securing influence over the world’s largest oil reserves.
Like Napoleon’s victories in Italy and at Austerlitz, this success fostered a dangerous aura of invincibility. It reinforced the belief that "Maximum Pressure", backed by overwhelming kinetic force, could reshape sovereign nations overnight. For an administration clearly determined to leave its mark on history, it served as proof of concept that complex geopolitical deadlocks could be broken not through decades of diplomacy, but through the singular, decisive application of American power.
However, as demonstrated during Napoleon’s Peninsular War, removing a ruler does not equate to subduing a state. The resilience of Venezuela’s political structure under Delcy Rodríguez, coupled with Washington’s subsequent need to ease sanctions on figures it sought to depose, highlights the superficial nature of the initial success. The outcome in Caracas represents a tactical victory masking a deeper strategic miscalculation of local political realities; a mistake the Trump administration would go on to make again.
The Iranian “1812”
Emboldened by events in Venezuela, the United States launched major combat operations against Iran on 28 February 2026 with similar ambitions of regime change and vassalage. However, despite nearly 900 strikes and the death of Iran’s long-standing Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, the Iranian state has not collapsed and appears far from surrendering. The prospect of a short, victorious war is now transitioning into an unwinnable war. Here, the administration has encountered its "empty Moscow"; just as Napoleon occupied a deserted, burning capital and waited in vain for a surrender that never came, the US underestimated the resilience of the Iranian state's ideological foundations and the decentralised command structure of its security apparatus. Once again, the US government appears to be finding itself in a strategic trap with no clear exit ramp.
Meanwhile, like the Russian Empire of 1812, the Iranian state has retaliated with a scorched earth strategy of its own - the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. By choking off 20% of the world’s oil and LNG supply, Iran has turned a regional conflict into a global economic crisis. The $100-per-barrel oil price and the collapse of the global supply chain are now haemorrhaging the global economy by the day. Indeed, it is not US forces that face the prospect of attritional decimation like Napoleon’s Grande Armée; it is the purchasing power of the American public - whose standard of living is tied to global stability and whose support Trump needs.
The Growing Isolation of the Hegemon
Napoleon’s downfall was not a single battle, but the exhaustion of his nation’s resources and the alienation of his allies. Today, we see a similar pattern emerging. The US finds itself diplomatically isolated, with even the United Kingdom organising coalition talks of its own (once again), to reopen the Strait of Hormuz independently of Washington. In Napoleonic terms, we are witnessing the formation of a "Seventh Coalition". The United States is transitioning from the undisputed leader of the global order to the "Ogre" that others, including its oldest allies, are scrambling to contain through closer alignment with one another.
A Presidency at Risk?
Domestically, Trump’s promised “two to three weeks” timeline for the Iran campaign has passed, replaced by sustained escalation, economic instability, and strategic uncertainty. Historically, American presidents have struggled to disengage from such costly interventions due to sunk cost dynamics. Trump will be aware of the damage a prolonged war in the Middle East entails for his popular support: fuel prices rising, American soldiers dying, treasury reserves depleting, and the redefining of "America First" will hurt his polling. However, unlike other US presidents, Trump’s political calculus is less tied to institutional credibility and more to maintaining support with his core domestic base through constant disinformation, allowing for abrupt policy reversals or contradictory positions, so long as they reinforce perceived strength and sustain narrative control.
A reframing of objectives, presenting the removal of Iranian leadership and degradation of military capabilities as sufficient success, would provide a viable exit narrative. Such a recalibration would allow for disengagement without formal defeat, even amid unresolved strategic conditions. A subsequent emphasis on symbolic demonstrations of strength could reinforce this narrative domestically. Do not be surprised if a military parade akin to the New York City Victory Parade of 1946 is demanded by the president to shore up the belief of a victorious campaign.
Ahead of the November midterm elections, it is quite possible that an intervention in Cuba will also be on the cards. An invasion of the island would likely be one of the simplest and quickest for the US military to achieve and would help boost Trump’s narrative of American strength and along with it, his polling numbers.
Following a third such intervention, Europe is likely to see renewed pressure on Greenland and a further deterioration of the global security order for the foreseeable future.
How Can We Help?
Spotlight Risks is on hand to provide international organisations the necessary actionable intelligence they will need to remain well aware of the changing political, economic, and security dynamics of a region or specific landscape.
Gain an understanding of where the potential flashpoints of the future are likely to be and their implications for international security. Provide your organisation with the intelligence and forecasting needed to make informed decisions necessary to help navigate shifting security trends, and recognise the risks and opportunities presented by this increasingly complex security environment.
Travel Security / Operational Level Risk Mitigation
Spotlight Risks are experts at providing organisations the necessary assistance to help them with any strategic planning, diversification, and proactive approach to risk management - key to reducing operational dependencies, maintaining operational resilience and securing assets and personnel in the face of these global challenges.
