Lead: President Donald Trump has signaled that Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro’s hold on power may end soon and has not ruled out strikes on Venezuelan soil. CNN reported on Nov. 15, 2025, that Trump received a briefing this week and has approved some covert measures, while the Pentagon announced Operation Southern Spear and moved more than a dozen warships and roughly 15,000 troops into the region. Military and regional experts warn that removing Maduro by force could trigger an extended U.S. military commitment, a fractured transition, or even civil conflict, with serious regional and domestic political costs.
Key Takeaways
- The Pentagon announced Operation Southern Spear on Thursday, moving over a dozen warships and about 15,000 U.S. troops into the region as of Nov. 2025.
- CNN reported the White House has reviewed updated options and that the president has authorized covert action inside Venezuela, though no decision on kinetic strikes has been taken.
- Analysts say the U.S. currently lacks the full set of ground and logistical assets required for a sustained regime-removal campaign without reinforcements or a long-term plan.
- Experts warn a Maduro exit could produce a military takeover, empower another hardline Chavista leader, or spark factional fighting involving colectivos, the ELN and criminal networks.
- Regional backers—Russia, China and Cuba—have financial and political ties to the Maduro regime that could blunt U.S. efforts or complicate post-strike stabilization.
- Senior analysts and diplomats argue any successful ouster would require prolonged political and security commitments—planning horizons of five to ten years have been proposed.
- Domestically, a sustained intervention risks eroding support among voters who backed Trump on a pledge to avoid protracted foreign wars.
Background
Venezuela’s political system has been shaped for two decades by Chavismo, the political movement rooted in Hugo Chávez’s presidency and continued under Nicolás Maduro. International observers widely criticized Maduro’s victory in 2018, and the U.S. recognized opposition leader Juan Guaidó in 2019; a later coup attempt failed to dislodge the regime. Maduro’s administration mixes civilian technocrats and military officers, a composition that has so far preserved a fragile internal equilibrium despite international isolation and deep economic collapse.
Beyond internal politics, Venezuela’s landscape includes armed nonstate actors and criminal networks that profit from drug and mineral trafficking. The presence of Colombian guerrillas such as the ELN and organized criminal syndicates complicates any transition, since those groups operate across porous borders and can exploit security vacuums. International patrons—Russia, China and Cuba—have invested diplomatically and economically in the regime and remain potential spoilers if kinetic action is taken.
Main Event
According to CNN’s Nov. 15, 2025 report, the White House reviewed options this week for operations inside Venezuela after Mr. Trump said Maduro’s days are numbered and that land strikes were possible. The Pentagon publicly framed recent movements as counterdrug operations under Operation Southern Spear, but the concentration of ships and troops has heightened pressure on Caracas. Officials also told reporters that covert action inside Venezuela has received presidential approval, though higher-profile strikes have not been ordered.
Experts who have studied Venezuela warn that striking to remove Maduro would face immediate political and operational hurdles. Opposition groups remain divided and lack consolidated control of security forces; some opposition leaders have plans to assume power quickly, but analysts say those plans depend heavily on sustained external backing. Former and current officials quoted by media note that the Venezuelan military—while its loyalty has been questioned—appears cohesive enough to suppress unrest, raising the risk of a military-backed transition rather than a civilian-led restoration.
The prospect of Maduro fleeing, being killed, or otherwise disappearing could set off competitive maneuvers among competing Chavista figures and military commanders. Observers point to the role Maduro currently plays as a stabilizer of rival factions; once removed, the informal balance he maintained could collapse, producing pitched fights over resources, local control, and the state apparatus. In addition, colectivos and criminal groups could expand control over territory and ports, deepening fragmentation.
Analysis & Implications
A kinetic effort to oust Maduro risks cascading into a long-term U.S. security commitment. Multiple interviewees and former officials told reporters that even a rapid decapitation of the regime would not create immediate stability: opposition leaders lack secure command of the armed forces and local policing, and would likely need U.S. assistance to hold key sites and protect officials. That assistance could extend from intelligence and funds to reconstituting parts of Venezuela’s security services.
Regionally, military action in Venezuela could unsettle neighboring countries and trade routes, and risk broader geopolitical friction. Russia, China and Cuba maintain diplomatic and economic footholds in Venezuela; while direct troop deployments from those states are unlikely, their political support, intelligence sharing and equipment transfers could blunt U.S. objectives and complicate post-conflict reconstruction. Analysts warn that strikes hitting assets tied to those states would heighten international tensions.
Domestically, the political calculus for the U.S. administration is fraught. Trump ran on reducing American entanglements abroad, and a major intervention in Latin America would test that promise. Congressional and public support for a prolonged stabilization mission is uncertain; several Capitol Hill staffers and GOP sources cited in reporting said sustained funding and political backing would be difficult to secure without a clear, long-term strategy that aligns with domestic priorities.
Comparison & Data
| Deployment/Scenario | Reported Figures |
|---|---|
| Operation Southern Spear (Nov. 2025) | More than a dozen warships; ~15,000 troops (Pentagon announcement) |
| Typical large-scale regime-removal ground force (historical reference) | 100,000–150,000 U.S. troops (comparable to early 2003 Iraq coalition levels) |
The table shows the rough scale of the current deployment versus troop levels associated with past full-spectrum invasions. Analysts say the present concentration—while significant for targeted strikes and deterrence—falls short of forces historically used to secure a country-wide political transition and sustain long-term peacekeeping and reconstruction tasks.
Reactions & Quotes
Officials, analysts and former policymakers offered contrasting perspectives on the risks and goals of any U.S. action.
“If the military is still cohesive…they will follow their discipline, assert military control, and suppress anyone who goes into the streets.”
John Bolton, former U.S. National Security Adviser (comment on military cohesion)
This comment reflects the view of a disciplined military potentially able to enforce order domestically even after a leadership change. Bolton framed a coherent military as a likely actor to prevent a rapid democratic transition.
“There is no way to guarantee [opposition] safety or ability to govern without the U.S. providing security.”
Juan González, Georgetown Americas Institute (regional analyst)
González emphasizes that opposition plans for a quick transition rely on external security guarantees; analysts cited his view that removing Maduro is the start of a long stabilization process, not its end.
“I doubt it. I don’t think so.”
President Donald Trump (on prospect of war with Venezuela)
Trump’s terse public answer underscores ambiguity in Washington about committing to a full-scale war, even as military assets are positioned in the region.
Unconfirmed
- Whether President Trump will order kinetic strikes inside Venezuela remains undecided; CNN reported briefings but no final decision.
- The precise level and form of direct military or material support from Russia, China or Cuba in response to U.S. strikes—beyond existing economic and diplomatic ties—remains unclear.
- The effectiveness of any opposition “100-hour” transition plan and its ability to govern without sustained international security guarantees is unproven.
Bottom Line
Removing Nicolás Maduro by force could achieve an immediate tactical objective but is likely to create a multi-year strategic challenge. Experts and diplomats warn that in the absence of a clear political plan and long-term security commitment, any ouster risks empowering military actors, hardline Chavista figures, or criminal networks rather than delivering a stable, democratic transition.
Policy choices now carry trade-offs: a short intervention with limited follow-through risks collapse into chaos, while a long-term stabilization effort requires political will, funding, and regional coordination that Washington may find difficult to sustain. The decisions by the White House and Congress in the coming weeks and months will shape whether the region faces protracted instability or a managed political transition.
Sources
- CNN (U.S. news report on Nov. 15, 2025) — original reporting on White House briefings, Pentagon movements and expert interviews.
- Georgetown University – Americas Institute (academic/think tank) — affiliation of analyst Juan González cited in reporting.
- Center for Strategic and International Studies (policy research) — regional analysis referenced for expert commentary on risks to U.S. assets.