Mon Dec 08 20:40:00 UTC 2025: US Military Action in Venezuela Could Spark Chaos, Experts Warn
Washington, D.C. – As the U.S. intensifies its military presence in the Caribbean and sharpens its rhetoric against the Maduro regime in Venezuela, experts warn that a U.S. strike could destabilize the nation rather than lead to a peaceful transition.
Since early September, the U.S. has conducted military strikes on Venezuelan boats, claiming they are involved in drug trafficking. While the Trump administration cites national security threats, critics argue that Venezuela isn’t a primary source of drugs entering the U.S. and that no sufficient evidence has been given.
President Trump has given conflicting statements on a potential ground operation but authorized CIA operations within Venezuela.
While military experts believe a full-scale ground invasion is unlikely due to political, legal, and logistical challenges, they highlight the possibility of air and missile strikes. However, analysts fear that any U.S. military action, even limited, could empower armed groups, criminalize dissent, and further fragment the already divided opposition.
Political scientist Salvador Santino Regilme noted that historical examples, such as Iraq and Libya, suggest that externally driven regime change rarely leads to stable democracy.
Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has rejected what he calls a “slave’s peace,” vowing to resist any attempts at regime change. Senior officials have framed potential U.S. action as an attack on national sovereignty.
The U.S., through the CIA, is reportedly working to undermine the loyalty of the Venezuelan military, potentially offering incentives for them to remain neutral during a conflict. However, analysts warn that the Venezuelan government has purged any opposition from the military forces, signalling the liklihood of a conflict, rather than a passive transition.
China and Russia are expected to offer continued diplomatic support to Maduro.
Experts also voiced concern that U.S. policy toward Venezuela could set a precedent for labeling domestic crises in other countries as “narco-terrorist” threats, justifying military action. This trend could further erode international law and regional diplomatic efforts.
First Piper 