In early 2026, President Donald Trump's administration initiated an action against Venezuela, culminating in the apprehension of President Nicolás Maduro. Aboard Air Force One, en route from Florida to Washington D.C., Trump reportedly told reporters that the U.S. government was now in control of Venezuela and that American companies were preparing to exploit the country's oil reserves. He also suggested that other nations could face similar intervention.

The action in Venezuela has sparked debate regarding the nature of U.S. foreign policy under the Trump administration. Some analysts argue that the intervention represents a new form of American imperialism, characterized by overt displays of power and a willingness to disregard international norms. Others contend that it is merely a continuation of established U.S. foreign policy, albeit one stripped of diplomatic pretense.

Critics of the administration's actions point to the potential violation of international law and the disregard for Venezuelan sovereignty. They argue that the intervention was motivated by economic interests, specifically the desire to control Venezuela's vast oil reserves. "This is a clear case of resource grab," said Dr. Elena Rodriguez, a professor of international relations at Georgetown University. "The administration is prioritizing corporate interests over international law and human rights."

However, supporters of the administration's policy argue that the intervention was necessary to address the political and economic crisis in Venezuela. They claim that Maduro's government was authoritarian and corrupt, and that the U.S. had a responsibility to protect the Venezuelan people. "We cannot stand idly by while a dictator oppresses his people," stated Senator John Miller (R-Texas). "The U.S. has a moral obligation to intervene."

The situation in Venezuela remains fluid. The U.S. government has installed an interim government and is working to stabilize the country. However, the intervention has been met with resistance from some sectors of Venezuelan society, as well as condemnation from other countries. The long-term consequences of the intervention for Venezuela and for U.S. foreign policy remain to be seen.