Event Summary
On 4 January 2026, civil society organisations in Trinidad and Tobago organised and held a peaceful protest outside the Venezuelan Embassy in Port of Spain in response to reported U.S. military strikes on Venezuela and the arrest of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. The protest took place after the military action was reported internationally and involved representatives from around ten civil society organisations, alongside the Venezuelan Ambassador to Trinidad and Tobago, Alvaro Sanchez Cordero.
Civil society participants publicly condemned the U.S. action, describing it as a violation of sovereignty and self-determination and warning that it could contribute to political destabilisation and regional instability. Speakers emphasised that U.S. military intervention historically results in economic disruption, displacement, and long-term instability, and framed the action as imperial aggression rather than humanitarian intervention. Several civil society representatives argued that any government enabling such actions, whether through policy alignment, strategic access, or silence, bears responsibility.
The protest occurred under visible police presence and proceeded without reported interference. Government officials reiterated that Trinidad and Tobago was not a participant in the military operation. The event illustrates increasing civil society engagement on international affairs and an expansion of civil society’s advocacy scope, indicating a maturing civic culture willing to engage critically with international affairs and their local implications.
At the same time, the State’s public response reflected limited responsiveness and dismissiveness toward civic expression. In particular, the PM was quoted as saying that the protest was “an abysmal failure”, even while affirming that protesters were free to express their views within the law. While freedoms of assembly and expression were formally respected, the characterisation of the protest as insignificant may undermine the legitimacy of civic action and signals a weak recognition of civil society’s role in public discourse. This contributes to an environment where participation is permitted but not meaningfully valued or engaged with.