After years of frustration with covert operations and failed diplomatic efforts, President Donald Trump is now deploying significant military force and considering direct strikes against Venezuela, marking a stark escalation in his bid to remove Nicolás Maduro. This “maximalist approach” follows a first term characterized by the CIA’s limited cyberattacks and resistance from Pentagon leadership.
The United States’ policy towards Venezuela has taken a dramatic turn, evolving from subtle, clandestine cyber operations to an overt display of military power. In the final year of President Donald Trump’s first administration, the CIA executed a successful, albeit temporary, cyberattack against the Venezuelan government. This operation specifically targeted and disabled the computer network of Nicolás Maduro’s intelligence service, a move described by sources familiar with the operation as a “throwaway” effort to appease the president and avoid more direct engagement in Caracas.
A History of Frustration and Resistance
Throughout his first term, President Trump consistently demanded military options to oust Maduro, a request that was frequently met with reluctance from both the Pentagon and intelligence leaders. White House officials often felt they were given the “runaround” by these agencies, who were wary of escalating conflict in Venezuela. In a notable incident in 2019, a top Pentagon official reportedly “banged his fist on the table” during a White House meeting, expressing frustration over repeated calls for more aggressive strategies, as documented by The Washington Post here.
This resistance was partly fueled by historical precedent. The CIA has a well-documented history of involvement in Latin American affairs during the Cold War, including several failed regime-change operations. This past experience fostered a strong reticence among agency leaders like then-Director Gina Haspel, who was known to oppose using agency personnel for covert operations against Maduro. The broader context of US foreign policy in the region and efforts to address the Venezuelan crisis can be explored further through resources like the Council on Foreign Relations backgrounder on Venezuela.
The Failed Guaido Strategy
In 2019, the administration pivoted to a strategy centered on diplomatic and economic support for Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido. Over 50 countries recognized Guaido as Venezuela’s legitimate head of state following Maduro‘s internationally decried 2018 election victory. However, this effort ultimately floundered. Guaido lacked practical means to assume power, failing to ignite massive street protests or sway the military, which largely remained loyal to Maduro. A failed coup attempt in the spring of 2019 solidified Guaido’s status as a president without a government.
The failure of the Guaido strategy deeply angered Trump, who felt both Guaido and his own government had “failed him” by backing a losing horse. This frustration solidified Trump‘s hawkish stance on Venezuela, leading to a greater desire for more direct and aggressive action in a potential second term.
The ‘Maximalist Approach’: Military Might and Covert Operations
The current landscape reveals a significant escalation in US strategy. Since the summer of 2025, the US has amassed a substantial military force in the region, including approximately 10,000 troops and an aircraft carrier en route from Europe. President Trump has openly discussed considering direct strikes on Venezuelan territory and has authorized the CIA to conduct covert activities. Visible indicators of these intentions include “attack demonstration” flights by US bombers off the Venezuelan coast.
While the administration characterizes this military buildup as a counternarcotics effort, its sheer scale and scope clearly suggest the possibility of a regime-change operation. As Jimmy Story, former top US diplomat to Venezuela (2018-2023), noted, “In the first Trump administration, he said that all options are on the table. Many of the options are now at the front door.”
Unconventional Tactics and Ethical Quandaries
The push for covert operations and cyberattacks intensified within the White House. The US military’s Cyber Command successfully disrupted the satellite communications of the Wagner Group, Russian mercenaries reportedly present in Venezuela, during Trump’s first term. Other ambitious, though ultimately unexecuted, ideas included a Coast Guard team focused on hacking drug traffickers and a proposal to take a Venezuelan hydroelectric dam offline via cyberattack.
The underlying hope for these aggressive covert actions was to destabilize the regime sufficiently to convince the Venezuelan military, a critical pillar of Maduro‘s power, to switch allegiance. However, this strategy has been criticized for lacking concrete “day after” planning, with one former White House official lamenting that “hope is not a plan.”
The ethical implications of such interventions are substantial. While the administration frames military actions as counternarcotics efforts, critics argue this narrative is a pretext for regime change, especially given that Venezuela is not a primary drug producer or transit point to the US. This “maximalist pressure,” now largely driven by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, a known Venezuela hawk, points towards an unpredictable future.
The End Game: Rendition or Rhetoric?
The ultimate goal of the current administration remains ambiguous. Some observers, like Jimmy Story, anticipate that the US naval presence in the Caribbean will be “deployed in some way” against the Venezuelan government. While not a force for invasion, it could facilitate “highly sophisticated rendition of senior leadership in the country,” Story told CNN.
However, President Trump is also acutely aware of the political risks associated with abandoning his non-interventionist promises, a platform that partly fueled his rise to power following the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. A former White House official suggested that the mercurial president might ultimately declare “victory” in Venezuela through various means, framing the situation as a “wag the dog” scenario where the outcome is whatever he chooses to define it as.
The unfolding situation in Venezuela underscores a pivotal moment in US foreign policy. The shift from low-key cyber interventions to a tangible military presence signals a new, more aggressive phase in the long-standing effort to challenge Maduro‘s rule. The consequences of this approach, both for Venezuela and regional stability, are yet to be fully realized, making it a critical area for continued observation and analysis.
