Finally, more than 100 days after the start of the US naval deployment in the Caribbean, Trump announced his decision to stop sea and land attacks. The primary targets, adelantó, are in Venezuela, although they also threaten Colombia in any country that produces drug trafficking. “We’re going to end up with these swine pigs” he said, typing up his declaration and that decisive touch that is his factory’s trademark. So, the crisis has reached its greatest point. If you know something is going to happen, but in what, when and how. But even as a rhetorical exercise, it remains valid to ask whether military action – whether with troops or surgical attacks – against Venezuela and other Latin American countries is truly inevitable.
Over the past week, Trump has gone public to warn the public that his government has come into contact with the dictatorship of Nicolas Maduro. First I say I will talk to him; I just revealed that I already had it, but I played it down by saying it was just a call. However, Reuters reported on the night the conversation took place on November 21 and lasted 15 minutes. Details: Maduro created a list of requirements for relinquishing power, which included an expanded pardon for hundreds of supporters, as well as an interim government headed by current Vice President Delcy Rodriguez. Trump agreed to allow him to leave the country with his family and gave him a verbal ultimatum to leave Venezuela before November 28, which did not happen. But I rejected everything else, because the definition of what cannot be given to Maduro does not fit it.
What is central is that, from that call, and from Trump’s subsequent and recent statements, five clear clues fell that reveal why the conflict entered its most critical and dangerous phase.
1. Personal conflict
The pulse was centered among the highest figures in each government. Despite his recent threats, and despite remaining important in the call, Trump sent a message directed more to Maduro than to the American public: the negotiation channel remains open without indicating immediate military action, but within the framework of maximum pressure. At the end of the match, Trump sang it to Maduro without guaranteeing his companion. Despite the huge disparity in power between the two countries, this situation favors Maduro, even if Trump is the one who controls Jogada’s clock. How did José de Córdoba explain this? The Wall Street JournalAt the end of this individual confrontation, there will be a president who won and another who lost. We know that Trump does not like to lose.
2. The real goal: regime change and control of the “back yard”
Under the rhetoric of anti-narcotics and population protection, the structural purpose of the United States is to bring about regime change and a transition in line with the opposition associated with María Corina Machado. It is, at the same time, an attempt to reposition the geopolitical position of the United States to justify hegemonic control over its “back yard,” this “little area here,” as Henry L. Kennedy called it in 1945. Stimson, Secretary of War under Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Here Venezuela functions as a resource state: political control, access to strategic assets and the ability to exert influence against other global actors.
3. The war of narratives and the erosion of the anti-drug barrier
Since the beginning of the naval deployment, he has been accused of this Maduro runs the Cartel de los Soles and experts have been questioned This means that it is a pretext promoted by Venezuelan opponents in Washington to facilitate military action.
The last Pardon for Juan Orlando HernandezThe former Honduran president who was sentenced to 45 years in prison for collaborating on the shipment of 500 tons of cocaine to the United States has further undermined the anti-drug narrative and highlighted Trump’s double morals. Is this strategic contradiction a blatant contradiction? – Its position has eroded at a time when its bombings in the Caribbean face increasing disapproval from Democrats and Republicans in Congress, between MAGA and In the general population.
It is worth highlighting the data. Only one in five Americans have heard enough about the military deployment to the Caribbean, while 70% of the population opposes military action. The refusal is based on concerns about violations of international law and possible war crimes associated with the bombing of ships allegedly loaded with drugs. All of this increases the political cost of timely and decisive action Trump’s approval numbers Touching historical lows. Consequently, the Venezuelan opposition led by María Corina Machado – which supported this narrative as a moral and strategic framework for confrontation with Maduro but was unable to explain it in “selling” it among the Americans – is also suffering from severe erosion.
4. Media Ecosystem and Limits Focus Centered on the United States
Media coverage such as New York Times, The Washington PostOr CNN The Guardian This sparked intense criticism among Venezuelans who accused them of “manufacturing consensus” in favor of Maduro. Although there is no such campaign, it is possible that there are anti-Trump sects of varying intensity.
Venezuelans’ discomfort is understandable, because it is based on a visionary framework that limits understanding of Venezuelan reality: producing reports that take the conflict away from Washington and not from the ground. Public media.
These coverages reflect the views of experts and academics who dominate analysis on Venezuela, professional inertia and editorial agendas geared toward what matters to the American professional class, without highlighting the stifling of Venezuelan society: the depth of corruption and Chaista repression in the collusion between its leadership (Maduro, Cabello, Padrino López) and criminal networks, Colombian drug guerrillas and groups like Hezbollah. This fuels misunderstanding and frustration among opponents and citizens who yearn for real change.
5. Fleet paralysis and the “jack-sin-dead” policy
Back to the fleet: Today is a symbol of a frozen jack and, for Venezuelans, a symbol of endless waiting. The lack of resolution has given Maduro enough time to promote an epic anti-imperialist rhetoric, marshal his regime’s strengths and improve his negotiating position, while increasing the strain on Trump and the Venezuelan opposition’s urgency to achieve tangible results. Although Trump has the power of executive action and has demonstrated his willingness to act even outside legal frameworks – and, of course, he can do so at any moment – he is also operating in a scenario saturated with international crisis: the Russian-Ukrainian war, global tensions over his foreign policies, the fragile peace in Gaza, and domestic resistance to his authoritarian impulses. All of this constitutes a condition for any decision on Venezuela. In this context, it is difficult for the regime’s isolation to lead to a result on its own. Without the strongest gesture from the United States. Maduro will continue to buy time and read Trump’s threats as part of his own trick What distinguishes him.
The corollary of this scenario is that inaction ends up being action with its own effects: perpetuating the crisis, eroding US credibility, and leaving the Venezuelan opposition trapped between expectations and frustration. It is difficult to recommend action within this framework, but if Washington is not clear, its next step should be a series of measures. First, assess the incentives that lead to Maduro’s departure and reduce the likelihood of armed resistance by Chavismo and its criminal associates to military intervention. Second, anticipate the human cost of military action, improve domestic political support for it and avoid a militaristic stance. Third, strengthening non-military alternatives without abandoning military deterrence. In short, avoid mistakes that could be very costly.
As these factors interact and generate new scenarios that can have unexpected impacts, narratives about regime change and transition in Venezuela are divided between three groups. First, anyone has confidence that Machado can lead the country to a democratic government under some kind of Trump’s protection. And second, the apocalyptic ones who believe that Maduro’s departure would usher in a new era of violence and chaos, as if Maduro were a necessary evil that contained even greater chaos, even though he hates it. Finally, they do not keep accounts, but rather consider Maduro an illegitimate and corrupt ruler who must relinquish power as quickly as possible. They know that any transition can be turbulent. They know that joining Trump carries the enormous risk of signing a Faustian pact. But I have confidence in the desire of the Mayor of Venezuela to restore their democracy and rebuild the future peacefully a quarter of a century after the Chavez disaster.