Senior leaders from the administration went to Capitol Hill to justify one of the boldest military operations in modern American memory: the seizure of a current national leader from his own capital.
Key cabinet members, the nation's top lawyer, the intelligence chief, and the chair of the joint chiefs briefed all 100 U.S. senators on Operation Absolute Resolve, the swift strike that removed the Venezuelan president, Nicolás Maduro, from his home in Caracas and brought him to a detention facility in New York.
This session marked the initial instance the entire chamber heard details of the 3 January attack, which involved U.S. special forces swooping into Venezuela before dawn to capture Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores.
Officials described a three-phase plan for Venezuela that revolved around oil: first, bringing order to the nation; next, finding access for companies to operate in the Venezuelan market; and a final phase described as “a transitional period.”
“We are going to take between 30 and 50 million barrels of oil,” one official stated. “We’re going to sell it in the marketplace at market rates, not at the discounts Venezuela was getting.”
Apart from petroleum, the operation has divided the capital along expected partisan divides. Republicans have rallied behind the characterization of the raid as a straightforward law enforcement action targeting an indicted drug trafficker. Democrats warn of an unlawful military aggression that could plunge Venezuela into chaos and establish a troubling new norm for executive power.
“What we did is we took out an illegitimate president,” one Republican senator said. “He was never properly voted into office, so there can’t be regime change if he should have never been in power to begin with.”
In the pre-dawn operation, elite troops hit several locations across northern Venezuela, apprehended Maduro and Flores, transported them to a U.S. Navy ship, flew them to a U.S. air base, and then turned them over to authorities in New York. Days later, Maduro stood in federal court pleading not guilty to charges including “drug terrorism” conspiracy.
One Democratic senator emerged from the confidential briefing incredulous, stating the administration is “going to take the oil by force.”
“This is an insane plan,” the lawmaker said. “They are talking about stealing Venezuelan oil at gunpoint for an unspecified time as a bargaining chip to micromanage the country.” The senator added that they “heard no comprehensive strategy” for ensuring Venezuela’s stability.
This criticism reflects wider citizen anxiety. Polls indicate a significant portion of the public believe the operation ought to have needed legislative authorization. Separate surveys found roughly three-quarters express worry the U.S. will become overly entangled in Venezuela. Overall public opinion echoes the partisan split on Capitol Hill.
“Across America, people are just saying what the hell is going on?” a senior Democratic leader stated. “We need answers as to how long this is going to last. We need answers on troop levels, financial cost, and what limits are in place.”
The question of what happens next in Venezuela remains murky. Leadership has stated the U.S. would “run” the country for an unspecified period.
“The reality is the entire Maduro apparatus is still intact,” one analyst noted. “Everyone is in great admiration of the capacity of our military... but there is no answer about the future plan.”
International condemnation has been swift. Numerous nations have denounced the operation. At the United Nations, representatives from other major powers demanded Maduro’s immediate release, while the U.S. justified the move as a precise police action.
Republican lawmakers are also turning their attention toward Greenland, citing defense concerns.
“China and Russia are operating off the coast Greenland,” one GOP senator said. “In my view, we have a very keen interest in Greenland.”
The administration has kept a naval fleet positioned off Venezuela’s coast and recently seized Venezuela-linked oil tankers, indicating it has no intention to reduce its stance.
“Our military is prepared to continue this,” a senior defense official told reporters. “We are an administration of deeds to advance our interests, and that is on full display.”