President Donald Trump’s handling of Venezuela signals a sharp escalation in U.S. power projection in the Western Hemisphere. It was marked by a dramatic special forces operation that removed Nicolás Maduro from power and thrust Washington into an openly coercive role. Rather than pursuing regime change through prolonged nation-building, the administration appears focused on regime decapitation followed by pressure on Maduro’s remaining inner circle. Especially Vice President Delcy Rodríguez who is now acting as president. Trump’s assertion that the United States is “in charge” of Venezuela underscores a hardened, unapologetic posture that treats sovereignty as secondary to American leverage.
The strategy aims to force compliance without the costs of occupation, but it carries significant risks. The White House seeks stability in Caracas while avoiding purges that could collapse the state and spark civil conflict. At the same time, Trump’s rhetoric about “running” Venezuela and securing access to its oil reserves has reignited accusations of modern imperialism and drawn criticism for bypassing Congress. Democrats have expressed alarm, while Republicans have largely rallied behind the president, at least for now.
What the policy is supposed to do
People view an apartment building on January 4, 2026, in La Guaira, Venezuela, that residents say was damaged during US military operations.
Jesus Vargas/Getty Images
The administration frames its approach as pragmatic coercion. Secretary of State Marco Rubio insists the goal is not Iraq-style intervention but pressure. Maintaining oil embargoes, leveraging military dominance and compelling Venezuela’s leadership to meet U.S. demands on drugs, migration, foreign influence and energy. Allies like Sen. Tom Cotton have been blunt, arguing that Washington intends to dictate terms to Caracas. Trump’s team believes that forcing obedience from the top could stabilize the country, restart oil production and push out Russian, Chinese and Iranian influence.
Yet doubts loom over whether Washington can truly control events without committing far greater resources. Former officials warn of a familiar disconnect between ambitious goals and limited means. Rodríguez may appear a workable interlocutor on paper, but she remains deeply embedded in the Chavista system. She faces internal power constraints and risks retaliation if she appears too aligned with Washington. Her tentative outreach to the U.S. has been met with explicit threats from Trump, raising questions about how much coercion can achieve before it backfires.
Washington wants ‘deals’ in Caracas
Venezuelan Vice President Delcy Rodríguez holds a news conference in Caracas on March 10, 2025.
Ariana Cubillos/AP
U.S. officials see an opportunity to reshape Venezuela into a pliant partner after years of neglecting Latin America. They hope to unlock oil revenues, weaken criminal networks and realign the region under U.S. influence. But the assumption that regime survivors will cooperate remains uncertain. Analysts note that Rodríguez lacks full backing from armed factions and must balance internal survival with external pressure, making her a fragile pillar for Trump’s broader gamble.
The administration’s reliance on her exposes Washington to the risk of repeating a familiar pattern. Policies that appear decisive from afar but unravel in local political realities. Even supporters concede that Rodríguez has yet to prove she will serve U.S. interests.
The US turn away from Venezuela’s democrats
A woman holds a banner depicting Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Corina Machado in Doral, Florida, on January 3, 2026.
Marco Bello/Reuters
Perhaps the most controversial shift has been Washington’s apparent sidelining of Venezuela’s democratic opposition. Trump openly dismissed María Corina Machado, a Nobel Peace laureate and symbol of the opposition movement. This pivot toward engaging regime remnants has stunned Venezuelans who expected Maduro’s removal to clear the way for democratic transition.
Rubio has defended the approach as realism, arguing that immediate elections are unrealistic after years of authoritarian rule and that U.S. national interests must come first. Critics on Capitol Hill counter that abandoning democratic principles undermines America’s morals and risks entangling the U.S. with the very repression it once condemned.
In the rush to secure oil, influence and dominance in the hemisphere, the United States now risks trading its long-stated support for Venezuelan democracy for a coercive partnership with familiar faces of the old regime. An outcome that could haunt both Caracas and Washington.
Reference
Collinson, S. (2026, January 5). The surprising US plan in Venezuela comes with huge risks for Trump. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2026/01/05/politics/trump-venezuela-rodriguez-maduro-democracy-analysis