U.S. Invasion of Venezuela Sparks Global Confusion Over Trump’s ‘Run the Country’ Plan
Washington, D.C. – The United States military launched a surprise invasion of Venezuela on January 3, 2026, capturing President Nicolás Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores in a dramatic extrajudicial rendition operation, plunging the region into uncertainty as President Donald Trump’s vague promises to “run the country” until a transition raises fears of prolonged occupation.[1]
In a fiery press conference just hours after the strikes, Trump declared, “We are going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition.” He hinted at deploying additional U.S. troops and outlined ambitious plans for American companies to seize control of Venezuela’s vast oil reserves, selling them abroad to fund reconstruction and compensate for past nationalizations.[1]
From Rhetoric to Raid: The Rapid Escalation
The operation marked a stunning escalation from longstanding U.S. pressure on Maduro’s regime, which has faced crippling sanctions and international isolation over human rights abuses and electoral fraud. U.S. forces swiftly overran key sites, capturing Maduro without reported major casualties, according to initial reports.[1]
Trump credited Senator Marco Rubio with backchannel communications to interim Venezuelan Vice President Delcy Rodríguez, claiming she responded, “We’ll do whatever you need,” and was “essentially willing to do what we think is necessary.” Rodríguez, described by Trump as having “really [no] choice,” is positioned as a potential collaborator in stabilizing the nation.[1]
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth echoed the economic focus, stating, “We are going to get American companies in there,” to invest billions in Venezuela’s dilapidated oil infrastructure. This would grant U.S. firms preferential access, rebuilding refineries and fields as a condition for compensation from seizures dating back nearly 50 years.[1]
Experts Question Feasibility and Intent
Analysts expressed deep skepticism over the plan’s viability. Phil Gunson of the International Crisis Group suggested Trump’s strategy might rely on fracturing Venezuela’s military loyalty, but early efforts appeared to falter before the invasion.[1]
Brian Fonseca, director of the Gordon Institute for Public Policy, argued that Trump prioritizes retaining U.S. economic dominance in Venezuelan oil over full regime change. He warned that a proper occupation would require a force “three or four times larger” than current deployments, potentially entangling the U.S. in a protracted conflict.[1]
The New York Times interpreted Trump’s words as signaling a de facto occupation, with U.S. oversight of governance and resources until elections or a handoff could occur – though no timeline was provided.[1]
International Backlash and Regional Ripples
The incursion drew swift condemnation from allies and adversaries alike. China and Russia, major Venezuelan creditors, decried the action as imperialism, vowing to protect their investments. Latin American nations, including Brazil under its new conservative leadership, urged restraint while quietly signaling openness to U.S. influence.[1]
Domestically, Trump’s base cheered the bold move as retribution for years of socialist mismanagement that turned Venezuela from oil-rich powerhouse to humanitarian disaster. Critics, including progressive Democrats, labeled it reckless adventurism, fearing it could ignite guerrilla warfare from Maduro loyalists.[1]
Oil at the Heart: Economic Prize or Quagmire?
Venezuela holds the world’s largest proven oil reserves, estimated at over 300 billion barrels, but production has plummeted to under 1 million barrels per day due to corruption, sanctions, and underinvestment. Trump’s vision positions U.S. majors like ExxonMobil and Chevron to lead revival, potentially flooding global markets and lowering prices – a boon for American consumers but a blow to OPEC rivals.[1]
Yet challenges abound. Rebuilding requires tens of billions, amid destroyed infrastructure and a workforce crippled by exodus. Maduro’s colectivos militias and army remnants pose ongoing threats, while hyperinflation and famine demand immediate aid.[1]
Fonseca noted, “Trump may be more interested in retaining US economic influence… especially in the oil industry,” suggesting the “transition” could evolve into indefinite stewardship.[1]
Uncertain Path Forward
Rodríguez’s purported cooperation offers a sliver of hope for a managed handover, but her ties to Maduro’s inner circle breed distrust among opposition figures like María Corina Machado, who demand free elections. Trump indicated U.S. “very strong involvement” in oil, but details on governance remain foggy.[1]
As U.S. troops dig in, the world watches a high-stakes gamble: Will Trump’s iron-fisted approach restore Venezuela, or sow seeds of endless chaos? With Maduro in custody and oil rigs beckoning, confusion reigns over what “running the country” truly entails.[1]
The fog of uncertainty mirrors the clouded skies over Caracas, where American flags now flutter amid the ruins of a fallen regime.