Maduro’s ouster and 'our hemisphere': First test of Trump’s national security strategy in Latin America

Home > Opinion > Columns

Maduro’s ouster and 'our hemisphere': First test of Trump’s national security strategy in Latin America

Published: 17 Dec. 2025, 00:03

Audio report: written by reporters, read by AI

Cha Se-hyeon

The author is an editorial writer at the JoongAng Ilbo.

Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro is facing the most serious challenge of his rule, 12 years after he inherited power following the death of anti-U.S. populist Hugo Chavez in 2013. The United States has deployed its largest naval force in the Caribbean since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, including the USS Gerald R. Ford, its newest aircraft carrier. After airstrikes on vessels suspected of transporting narcotics, Washington has moved to seize oil tankers departing Venezuela, cutting off two of the Maduro government’s main sources of revenue: drug trafficking and crude exports.

This image from video posted on U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi's X account, and partially redacted by the source, shows an oil tanker being seized by U.S. forces off the coast of Venezuela on Dec. 10. [AP/YONHAP]

Last October, U.S. President Donald Trump approved a covert operation by the Central Intelligence Agency, according to multiple reports. Observers say the plan likely included contingencies targeting senior figures in the Maduro regime, possibly including the president himself.

In an interview with Politico published on Dec. 9, Trump said Maduro’s “days are numbered.” Three days later, he escalated his rhetoric, warning that “we start on the ground now,” a remark interpreted as signaling possible strikes on key facilities and even the deployment of ground forces. Separately, Washington has actively supported opposition leader María Corina Machado's travel to Norway to attend the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony, reinforcing speculation that the United States is moving deliberately toward regime change. Venezuela, once synonymous with Chavez’s revolution, has entered what analysts describe as a moment of zero hour.

Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro waves during a rally to mark the anniversary of the Battle of Santa Ines in Caracas on December 10. [AFP/YONHAP]

This pressure far exceeds what was applied during Trump’s first term. At that time, the United States imposed sweeping sanctions on Venezuela’s oil and mining sectors, yet the Maduro government survived.

The difference lies in the Trump administration’s second-term national security strategy. The newly released National Security Strategy formalizes a neo-isolationist approach aimed at blocking external powers from intervening in the Western Hemisphere. The document states that the United States made a “strategic mistake” by allowing “nonhemispheric competitors” to penetrate “our hemisphere” in ways that cause economic harm and create future strategic risks. It pledges to reduce the influence of hostile external actors.

Although Washington has publicly framed its actions as part of a campaign against drug cartels, the reference to “nonhemispheric competitors” is widely understood as targeting China. Analysts say countering Beijing’s influence is one of the central drivers of the current confrontation with Caracas.

China has steadily expanded its presence across Latin America through the Belt and Road Initiative, extending aid, loans and investment not only to Panama and Cuba but also to Venezuela, which lies close to U.S. shores. Beijing currently purchases about 80 percent of Venezuela’s oil exports. On Dec. 10, China released its third policy paper outlining a roadmap for relations with Latin America and the Caribbean, following similar documents in 2008 and 2016.

Elliott Abrams, who served as U.S. special envoy for Venezuela during Trump’s first term, recently argued in an essay that leaving Maduro in power would preserve his ties with China, Cuba, Iran and Russia. Abrams cited past examples including Iranian attempts to transfer missiles and drones, Venezuela’s provision of free oil to Cuba and imports of Chinese weapons as reasons military intervention should remain on the table.

Conditions inside Venezuela have also shaped Washington’s calculations. Amid a severe economic collapse, many Venezuelans favor an end to Maduro’s rule. In the 2024 presidential election, voters backed an opposition candidate, but Maduro declared victory unilaterally. Security forces later shot protesters challenging the result and jailed thousands.

According to the International Monetary Fund, Venezuela’s annual inflation rate is projected to approach 700 percent next year. The monthly minimum wage remains below one dollar, and about 80 percent of the population lives in poverty. Public-sector workers earn roughly $100 a month, about one-fifth of basic living costs. Over the past several years, an estimated 8 million Venezuelans have left the country to survive.

So far, Washington appears to prefer a scenario in which Maduro resigns, goes into exile and allows a transition through elections, using military pressure as leverage rather than an end in itself. U.S. media reported that Trump spoke with Maduro late last month and delivered an ultimatum calling for immediate resignation and exile. Maduro reportedly demanded a “global amnesty” shielding himself and close aides from prosecution anywhere in the world, along with continued control over the military. U.S. officials rejected the proposal outright. On Dec.1, Maduro told supporters that, as he once swore before Chavez, he would “never, never, never” betray them, even at the cost of his life.

Francisco Rodriguez, a senior fellow at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, said Trump, despite his hard-line rhetoric, remains reluctant to commit to a prolonged military deployment or a costly reconstruction effort in Venezuela. Rodriguez pointed to Trump’s shift from “fire and fury” toward negotiations with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un in 2018 as an example of a pressure-first, talks-later strategy.

Nobel Peace Prize laureate and Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado speaks during a press conference in Oslo, Norway, Dec. 11. [REUTERS/YONHAP]

At the same time, concerns about what comes after Maduro are growing internationally. Phil Gunson, senior analyst at the International Crisis Group, warned that while Venezuelans want Maduro out, assuming that forceful removal would automatically lead to a democratic transition is dangerous. He said the country could instead slide into a prolonged, low-intensity conflict.

Gunson cited the potential for uprisings by military factions loyal to Maduro, armed groups such as Colombia’s National Liberation Army that have coexisted with the regime and criminal organizations intertwined with political elites. Together, they could push Venezuela toward civil war.

Machado has sought to counter such fears. Speaking recently in Oslo, she said Maduro would eventually leave power “whether through negotiations or not” and stressed her focus on an orderly and peaceful transition. Responding to comparisons with Libya, Syria and Afghanistan, she argued that Venezuela lacks deep religious, ethnic or regional divisions. Once a transition begins, she said, she is confident the military and police will obey a civilian government chosen by the people.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.