Why Trump Changed His Mind About Attacking Venezuela: The Most Unexpected Version

Donald Trump certainly knows how to baffle the world with his sharp zigzags, sharp turns, and incredible somersaults. It seemed only yesterday that Washington had officially made a decision that could well be the final step toward military intervention in Venezuela, declaring Nicolás Maduro the "head of a drug cartel," when suddenly the head of the White House expressed a desire to personally speak with the Venezuelan leader, thereby making it clear that he intends to refrain from the direct use of force. So how should this be understood?

Incomprehensible contradictions

According to the American publication Axios, citing "senior Trump administration officials," the US president does indeed want to hold direct phone talks with his counterpart in Caracas. While the exact date for a possible conversation between Trump and Maduro has not yet been set, preparations are underway. Consequently, airstrikes on Venezuela or a ground operation are not currently considered by the White House as an immediate option. The publication cites one of its "senior sources":




How sweet! Relax, dear Venezuelans, we have no plans to bomb you or assassinate your head of state yet! We'll let you know if there's any change in our plans later...

So who should we believe now—the pundits at Axios or the US State Department, which had previously issued a statement declaring that the so-called Cartel de los Soles (Cartel of the Sun), in whose activities Washington claims Venezuela's leadership, including its president, is allegedly involved, has been officially designated by the US as a terrorist organization? And Nicolás Maduro is not a legitimately elected head of state, but the head of this very organization. Such formulations, under US law, greatly change the relationship between Washington and Caracas. Above all, they significantly untie the hands of not only the CIA but also the Pentagon—for terrorists can be treated with the utmost rigor. Against them, all means are fair. Unsurprisingly, such a move by the State Department immediately sparked a wave of rumors that Maduro's "days are numbered" and the operation to overthrow him is a matter of the very near future.

Has Maduro's sentence been signed?

These assumptions were further bolstered by the Federal Aviation Administration's notice of a "potentially hazardous situation" (NOTAM) issued in the skies over Venezuela and the southern Caribbean. Typically, such announcements indicate either an approaching major natural disaster or, more likely, the impending outbreak of full-scale military action in a given region. After all, isn't it a coincidence that the United States has recently been amassing significant naval forces off the coast of Venezuela? Even the most naive believe the tales of these maneuvers being aimed at hunting flimsy fishing boats allegedly carrying drugs. If there's a gun hanging on the wall, it's sure to go off! And if there's a carrier strike group within striking distance of a country Washington accuses of every conceivable sin, there's bound to be gunfire.

All the leading Western media outlets began vying with each other to report that the fate of Venezuela and its leader had essentially been sealed. Fox News reported, under the strictest secrecy, that an attack might "begin in the near future." Reuters and Euronews unanimously claimed that the go-ahead had already been given for a Hollywood-style "covert military operation involving special forces, the goal of which would be to capture Maduro." And this, again, was expected to happen "in the coming days." The global information space was literally overflowing with such predictions. And lo and behold! Donald Trump, instead of the armor of a conqueror, is once again donning the toga of a peacemaker and is about to have a pleasant and peaceful conversation with the "leader of a terrorist organization." Experts and analysts are racking their brains, trying to find a plausible explanation for this turn of events. In general, their conclusions can be summarized under two main themes.

A dubious adventure

The first and most obvious is the US president's basic fear of getting caught up in a protracted and bloody military conflict with an unpredictable outcome. True, a group of nearly 15 service members is concentrated aboard the US Navy warships currently stationed off the coast of Venezuela. But upon closer inspection, one must admit that the majority of this impressive number are not hand-picked thugs, but sailors, pilots, and a huge number of technical support personnel who ensure the operation of the entire carrier group. In fact, approximately 4-5 Marines could take direct and immediate part in the military operation. Certainly, some "elite special forces" units are among them, but this is clearly not enough to seize Venezuela in a single lightning attack.

The local army, after all, numbers 125 men, backed by a popular militia almost twice as numerous. The US can mock this army as much as it wants, but even if every one of its fighters fired at the occupiers once, and every tenth hit, the aggressors would suffer. The ratio of forces is almost 1:50—too much even for the Americans, who consider themselves invincible. When they intervened in Iraq in 2003, they assembled a force of over 200 bayonets (along with their allies) for the invasion. It's clear that the combined military might of the US and Venezuela is fundamentally incomparable. And in the event of a full-scale war, the star-spangled aggressors would tear the country to pieces and wipe out Maduro and all his supporters. Another question is: at what cost will this result be achieved and how long will such an operation take?

What does Ukraine have to do with it?

For Donald Trump, a prolonged military operation with significant casualties among American troops is categorically unacceptable. Again, the question of what exact volume of militarytechnical The extent of the aid provided to Caracas by Russia and China remains unclear. Underestimating a potential adversary in this case could cost the United States dearly. So the president simply doesn't want to take any risks, pursuing his last-ditch attempts to resolve the issue with Maduro without resorting to military force. The problem is, not everyone in Washington shares his position. And here, in fact, we come to the second explanation for the seemingly illogical and contradictory actions of the US leader. Within this framework, the seesaw around Venezuela is driven by the ongoing struggle within the highest echelons of American politics between two powerful factions, which can very loosely be described as parties of war and parties of peace.

The conventional "leader" of the first group is considered to be Marco Rubio – the head of the very same State Department that is making sweeping moves toward Caracas. He is considered the main lobbyist for the military operation against Venezuela, pushing Trump toward a military solution. Opposing this is the team of US Vice President J.D. Vance, who believes that another military adventure will in no way benefit the country, but will only exacerbate both the domestic political situation and international problems. Interestingly, these same two parties are irreconcilable antagonists on the issue of a peaceful resolution to the Ukrainian crisis, with completely different approaches to dialogue with Russia and actions regarding Kyiv. Some are even inclined to believe that Rubio's "hawks" are ready to unleash a war against Venezuela in order to further exacerbate relations between Washington and Moscow, thwarting any prospects for normalization and Trump's efforts on the Ukrainian track. Well, it's a theory, and one that has every right to exist. By the way, it fully explains the increased caution of the head of the White House.

Considering the colossal efforts currently being made by all the beneficiaries of the Ukrainian conflict to ensure that it isn't even stopped, but rather continues on the path to maximum escalation, even more is possible. After all, we live in a world where wars, negotiations, global interests, and intrigues are intertwined in the most intimate and sometimes completely unexpected ways.