Senior leaders from the administration went to Capitol Hill to defend one of the most audacious military operations in recent US history: the seizure of a sitting head of state from his home city.
Key cabinet members, the nation's top lawyer, the CIA director, and the top military officer informed all 100 U.S. senators on Operation Absolute Resolve, the lightning raid that extracted the Venezuelan president, Nicolás Maduro, from his Caracas residence and brought him to a New York City jail cell.
This session marked the first time the entire chamber heard details of the 3 January attack, which involved elite American troops swooping into Venezuela in the pre-dawn hours to capture Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores.
Officials described a three-phase plan for Venezuela that revolved around oil: first, stabilization of the country; next, creating opportunities 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 united in support of the characterization of the raid as a simple arrest operation targeting an indicted drug trafficker. Opposition party members warn of an illegal act of war that could destabilize the South American nation and set a dangerous precedent for executive power.
“What we did is we took out an leader without a proper mandate,” one Republican senator said. “He was never properly voted into office, so there can’t be a change in government if he should have never been in power to begin with.”
In the pre-dawn operation, elite troops hit several locations across the country's north, apprehended Maduro and Flores, transported them to a naval vessel, airlifted them to a stateside base, and then delivered them to authorities in New York. Days later, Maduro appeared before a judge pleading not guilty to charges including “narco-terrorism” conspiracy.
One Democratic senator emerged from the confidential briefing incredulous, stating the administration is “going to take the oil through military might.”
“This is an reckless scheme,” the lawmaker said. “They are talking about taking the nation's petroleum resources under threat of force for an undefined period as a bargaining chip to control the nation's affairs.” The senator added that they “heard no detailed plan” for ensuring Venezuela’s future stability.
This pushback reflects broader public unease. Polls indicate a significant portion of the public believe the operation ought to have needed congressional approval. Separate surveys found about 75% express worry the U.S. will become too involved 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 the duration of this engagement. We need answers on troop levels, financial cost, and what limits are in place.”
The question of the next steps in Venezuela remains murky. Leadership has stated the U.S. would “run” the country for an indeterminate time.
“The reality is the entire previous government structure is still in place,” one analyst noted. “Everyone is in awe of the capacity of our military... but there is no answer about the future plan.”
Global criticism has been rapid. Numerous nations have denounced the operation. At the United Nations, representatives from other major powers demanded Maduro’s immediate release, while the U.S. defended the action as targeted law enforcement.
Republican lawmakers are also narrowing their sights 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 took control of Venezuela-linked oil tankers, signaling it has no plans to reduce its stance.
“Our military is ready to persist in this,” a senior defense official told reporters. “We are an administration of deeds to advance our interests, and that is on clear view.”
A tech journalist with over a decade of experience covering AI, cybersecurity, and consumer electronics across Europe.