Secretary of State Marco Rubio significantly walked back suggestions of potential additional military action in Venezuela during Senate testimony Wednesday, instead assuring lawmakers that no further operations are anticipated while defending President Trump’s decision to forcibly remove Nicolas Maduro from power. The clarification came as Rubio faced intense bipartisan questioning about the administration’s broader foreign policy approach and its implications for American alliances.
The former Florida senator emphasized that Venezuela’s situation has demonstrably improved following the January 3rd raid, projecting continued positive developments over coming months. He described interim authorities as cooperative and receptive to American requirements, suggesting the threat level has decreased sufficiently to make additional military intervention unnecessary. This represented a strategic retreat from prepared remarks indicating Washington’s willingness to use force again if interim leaders proved uncooperative.
Rubio provided detailed explanations of the economic framework being imposed on Venezuela, including restoration of limited oil sales with revenue directed into American-controlled accounts. Monthly budget submissions from Caracas will require Treasury approval before funds are released, ensuring Washington maintains substantial influence over governmental spending priorities and economic policy decisions. The arrangement effectively ties Venezuela’s financial recovery to compliance with American demands.
Republican senators generally endorsed the Venezuela operation, with Chairman Risch revealing that approximately 200 troops participated in a firefight lasting less than 27 minutes. He characterized the mission as exceptionally brief and targeted, while suggesting Venezuela might need sustained international oversight to conduct credible democratic elections. This marked the first public disclosure of specific operational details since the controversial raid occurred.
Beyond Venezuela, Rubio sought to reassure allies concerned about Trump’s aggressive statements regarding Greenland and NATO. He reported productive ongoing discussions about Arctic strategic interests and dismissed characterizations of presidential rhetoric as uniquely damaging to alliances. The Secretary maintained that fundamental alliance commitments remain intact despite contentious debates about defense spending and burden-sharing arrangements that have strained transatlantic relationships.