The Uncertain Path Forward: Governing Venezuela After Maduro

However, the departure of Maduro does not automatically guarantee a brighter future for Venezuela. The immediate question is: what comes next? President Trump has stated the United States will “run” Venezuela, but details remain conspicuously absent. History is replete with examples of regime change operations faltering due to a lack of post-intervention planning. The current situation bears an unsettling resemblance to the ambiguous plans for postwar Gaza, as outlined in a recent Board of Peace proposal.

The administration appears inclined to work with Delcy Rodríguez, Maduro’s former vice president, and retain much of the existing governmental structure. While Rodríguez has publicly demanded Maduro’s release and condemned the U.S. action, her cooperation will be crucial for maintaining a semblance of order. However, simply replacing one leader with another without broader systemic changes may not constitute genuine regime change.

The Opposition’s Hopes and Trump’s Disinterest

Venezuela’s opposition initially greeted Maduro’s removal with cautious optimism, viewing it as a long-awaited opportunity for liberation. Leaders like Nobel laureate María Corina Machado have called for the recognition of Edmundo González Urrutia, the declared winner of the 2024 election, as the legitimate president. Yet, President Trump has expressed skepticism towards both Machado and Urrutia, dismissing Machado’s influence and failing to mention Urrutia by name.

Perhaps most concerning is Trump’s conspicuous silence on the issue of democracy. This omission raises serious questions about the political legitimacy of any future Venezuelan government. Many who supported the U.S. intervention had hoped for a genuine transition to freedom, not merely a shift in priorities towards drug control and oil revenues. Trump’s stated objectives – stemming the flow of migrants, halting drug trafficking, and securing access to oil – do not explicitly include the restoration of democratic governance.

Did You Know? Venezuela possesses the world’s largest proven oil reserves, estimated at over 300 billion barrels, yet its economy has been in freefall for years due to mismanagement and corruption.

Ripple Effects Across the Western Hemisphere

The swift removal of Maduro has sent shockwaves throughout the Western Hemisphere. While most nations welcomed his departure, driven by a desire for Venezuelan refugees to return home, the U.S. action has fundamentally altered the rules of engagement. Latin American leaders now face a period of heightened uncertainty. Trump’s blunt rhetoric – warning the Colombian president to “watch his ass” and hinting at action against Mexico – underscores the potential for further intervention. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has even suggested that the Cuban government should be concerned.

Reports indicate that the Pentagon has developed contingency plans for securing access to the Panama Canal, further fueling anxieties in the region. Even if the administration does not intend to pursue additional military interventions, the mere possibility casts a long shadow over governments perceived as hostile to U.S. interests.

International support for the U.S. action has been limited. Russia, Iran, and Cuba, unable or unwilling to assist Maduro, mirrored the lack of support from Moscow, Pyongyang, and Beijing when Israel and the U.S. responded to Iranian aggression last year. Autocratic alliances, it seems, have their limits. Similarly, expressions of concern from European nations have been largely symbolic.

Ultimately, the most significant consequences will be felt by both Venezuela and the United States. The U.S. has a long history of resisting nation-building efforts, only to become entangled in them. Trump’s commitment to “running” Venezuela suggests a continuation of this pattern. Nation-building is a complex and protracted process, with a decidedly mixed record of success. Yesterday’s operation was undoubtedly a significant event, but it represents not an end, but rather, as the President himself might say, “only the end of the beginning.”

What long-term strategies will the U.S. employ to stabilize Venezuela and foster a sustainable democratic transition? And how will the international community respond to the evolving situation in the region?

Frequently Asked Questions About the Venezuela Intervention

• What was the primary reason for the U.S. intervention in Venezuela?

  The U.S. cited Maduro’s corruption, repression, and the fraudulent 2024 election as key justifications for the intervention, alongside concerns about drug trafficking and regional stability.

• Will Delcy Rodríguez be able to effectively govern Venezuela with U.S. oversight?

  Rodríguez’s ability to govern will depend heavily on her willingness to cooperate with Washington and implement meaningful reforms, a prospect complicated by her initial condemnation of the U.S. action.

• What is the current status of Edmundo González Urrutia, the winner of the 2024 Venezuelan election?

  Despite winning the 2024 election, Urrutia has not been recognized by President Trump, raising concerns about the legitimacy of any future government formed without a clear democratic mandate.

• How might the Maduro intervention impact other Latin American countries?

  The intervention has created a climate of uncertainty in Latin America, with leaders now wary of potential U.S. intervention and facing increased pressure to align with U.S. interests.

• What role will oil revenues play in the future of Venezuela under U.S. influence?

  Securing a share of Venezuela’s vast oil revenues is a stated priority for the Trump administration, but the extent to which these revenues will be used to benefit the Venezuelan people remains unclear.