U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio indicated on Sunday that the United States would not be directly involved in governing Venezuela on a day-to-day basis except for enforcing an existing “oil quarantine” on the country. This stance contrasted with President Donald Trump’s earlier announcement that the U.S. would take charge of Venezuela following the removal of leader Nicolás Maduro.
Rubio’s comments during television appearances appeared to address concerns about potential prolonged foreign intervention or unsuccessful attempts at nation-building resulting from assertive American actions to bring about regime change. In contrast to Trump’s broad assertions of temporary U.S. control over the oil-rich nation, Rubio emphasized the continuation of enforcing the existing oil quarantine on sanctioned tankers as leverage to push for policy changes in Venezuela.
While Trump reiterated his assertion of being “in charge,” interim Venezuelan leader Delcy Rodríguez adopted a conciliatory tone, inviting collaboration with the U.S. in a newly cooperative approach. Rubio elaborated that the U.S. would sustain the oil tanker blockade to press for changes benefiting both the American national interest and the Venezuelan people, particularly focusing on reforms in the oil industry and combating drug trafficking.
Rodríguez’s shift in tone towards seeking “respectful relations” with the U.S. marked a departure from her previous defiant rhetoric. She extended an invitation for cooperation with the U.S. on a cooperative agenda focused on mutual development within the framework of international law. This change came after her initial condemnation of the U.S. operation and defense of Maduro as the rightful leader of Venezuela.
Trump’s repeated assertion of intending to “run” Venezuela stirred concerns among Democrats and some factions of his Republican base opposed to foreign interventions, drawing comparisons to past nation-building efforts in the Middle East. Rubio dismissed such criticisms, emphasizing the distinctive mission in the Western Hemisphere and the need to assess the actions of Maduro’s subordinates now in power.
Furthermore, Trump hinted at potential U.S. military actions in Colombia and Mexico, suggesting a focus on combatting drug trafficking in these countries. He also speculated on Cuba’s future, stating that the country might undergo change without direct U.S. intervention. Trump’s remarks on addressing drug trafficking in Mexico and potential involvement in Colombia contrasted with his views on Cuba.
Following the U.S.-led operation resulting in Maduro’s capture and arrival in New York, legal experts questioned the operation’s legality due to the lack of congressional approval. Despite Rodriguez’s calls for Maduro’s release and recognition as Venezuela’s legitimate leader, the U.S. government indicted Maduro and his wife on narco-terrorism charges, portraying his administration as corrupt and illegitimate.
The U.S. operation in Venezuela, conducted under the cover of darkness, unfolded with meticulous planning and execution by American forces. The city of Caracas remained subdued in the aftermath of the operation, with minimal activity and businesses closed. The quiet atmosphere reflected the uncertainty and impact of Maduro’s removal on the Venezuelan capital.
Overall, the situation in Venezuela following the U.S.-led operation highlighted geopolitical tensions, legal concerns, and the potential implications for the country’s future governance.