Rising Tensions: How Trump's Policies Are Impacting U.S.-Venezuela Relations

Share this @internewscast.com

The clamor for military intervention in Venezuela is becoming increasingly insistent.

According to a report by The Wall Street Journal on Thursday, the Trump administration has pinpointed potential land targets within the South American country. Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro has responded with intense outrage, perceiving this as a campaign by Washington to overthrow his regime.

Simultaneously, there have been no fewer than 14 American attacks on Caribbean vessels, many linked to Venezuela. The Trump administration claims these ships are involved in drug smuggling, although the evidence provided to support these assertions remains minimal.

Here are the essential details you need to know.

Trump refutes claims of a decision to attack Venezuela

Recent weeks have seen a significant escalation in tensions, highlighted by Trump’s admission that he approved CIA operations within Venezuela.

It contended that the identification of targets by the U.S. set the stage for air strikes that would “send a clear message to Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro that it is time to step down.”

The Journal’s story also noted “potential targets” that were being looked at included “ports and airports controlled by the military that are allegedly used to traffic drugs.”

A separate story from the Miami Herald on Friday asserted that the Trump administration “has made the decision to attack military installations inside Venezuela.”

Any such attack would be an obvious act of war against Venezuela, which has a population of about 28 million and combined armed forces of around 120,000 people.

The White House has, however, pushed back on the reporting.

White House spokesperson Anna Kelly told Fox News on Friday that “unnamed sources don’t know what they’re talking about.”

Trump himself, when asked about the stories on Air Force One by Kellie Meyer of The Hill’s partner , said “No, it’s not true.”

A long backstory

The backstory of the tensions between the U.S. and Maduro stretch back years.

Maduro ascended to the presidency after the death of his ally and political mentor, former President Hugo Chávez. Chávez, with whom Maduro shares a hard-left ideology, was a persistent foe of Washington. The relationship of mutual suspicion included Chávez alleging that the U.S. was behind a failed coup attempt against him in 2002.

Chávez was controversial, but Maduro has taken Venezuela in a much more authoritarian direction.

He has spent much of the past decade consolidating power and cracking down on opponents. Last year’s elections, which he claims to have won, were broadly condemned as fraudulent, with credible claims of widespread vote-rigging.

The United States does not officially recognize Maduro as the president a position that the State Department notes is also held by more than 50 other nations. In August, the Trump administration upped the reward for information leading to Maduro’s arrest to $50 million.

Trump’s other lines of attacks against Maduro are often questionable, however.

He has sought to link Venezuela to the importation of fentanyl into the U.S. In fact, most experts believe very little fentanyl comes from Venezuela, which is more often used as a way-station by Colombian cocaine smugglers.

The nation is also in Trump’s crosshairs on immigration policy. Trump has sought to invoke the Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan migrants. This argument rests on the idea that the U.S. is suffering an invasion by the Tren de Aragua gang with the approval or complicity of the Maduro regime.

This thesis is strongly disputed by liberal groups in the U.S., which see it a thin pretext for Trump to expand his own powers.

Maduro reacts with rage

Maduro contends Washington is trying to remove him.

The Venezuelan leader has said the U.S. is “inventing a new eternal war” and “fabricating a new war.”

The Washington Post reported Friday that Maduro has been reaching out to China, Russia and Iran seeking potential cooperation to strengthen his defenses against any American aggression.

In August, Maduro said he was willing to deploy more than 4 million militia members to help buttress the nation’s defenses. Other members of his government have spoken about defending “every inch” of the national territory.

Yet, the Venezuelan regime has made some conciliatory noises. The New York Times reported in mid-October that Maduro had offered the U.S. “a dominant stake in Venezuela’s oil and other mineral wealth” in an effort to reduce tensions.

The overture didn’t work.

Role of Rubio roils MAGA

The prospect of military action against Venezuela has caused unease within Trump’s Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement and among libertarian-leaning Republicans.

In the first category, influential MAGA figures like Steve Bannon, Tucker Carlson and Laura Loomer have been skeptical about hawkish moves against Caracas, in essence arguing that such plans transgress Trump’s “American First” principles.

In the second category, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has been strongly critical of the strikes against boats in the Caribbean and has called for congressional constraints on Trump’s actions.

On the other side of the equation, Secretary of State Marco Rubio is widely seen as advocating for a more aggressive course.

Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants, has long taken a dim view of left-wing “strongmen” leaders in Latin America including Maduro.

He is said to have sought to outflank more isolationist voices in Trump’s circle by emphasizing the drug issue and using that as the primary rationale for piling more pressure on Maduro.

Trump did forsake his isolationist instincts when the U.S. bombed Iran in June and the worst fears around those attacks did not come to pass. Still, an attack on Venezuela would be a risky endeavor, especially if Maduro was not toppled quickly.

The situation is on a knife-edge

It is, of course, possible that the U.S. is just saber-rattling and that Trump will ultimately back away from direct military action.

But it could just as easily go the other way.

The Miami Herald said its sources had contended that the U.S. could strike Venezuelan targets from the air “in a matter of days or even hours.” Trump recently dispatched another aircraft carrier to join the seven U.S. warships already in the vicinity of Venezuela.

If an attack on land transpires, it will pitch the world into another crisis with Trump again at its center.