VENEZUELA - No War, No Invasion, No Regime-Change Campaign

Why It’s Inaccurate to Claim Trump Started a “Regime-Change War” Against Venezuela

Lucian Seraphis

Jan 03, 2026

Accusations that Donald Trump initiated a “regime-change war” against Nicolás Maduro have proliferated in political commentary. The phrase evokes images of prolonged military campaigns such as Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan—conflicts involving sustained combat, large troop deployments, and long-term occupations.

But when we look at the documented record, such a characterization does not match what actually happened. What unfolded was a mix of criminal indictments, sanctions, targeted pressure, and isolated military operations—significant and controversial in their own right, but not a regime-change war by any standard definition.

1. Maduro Was Already Under U.S. Criminal Indictment

A foundational fact often omitted from “regime-change” arguments is that Maduro was already charged in U.S. courts long before any talk of military action.

In March 2020, the U.S. Department of Justice unsealed an indictment charging Nicolás Maduro and 14 current and former Venezuelan officials with narco-terrorism, drug trafficking, and related offenses. The indictment alleges that Maduro and others conspired with Colombia’s FARC to use cocaine to “flood the United States” and harm American communities. Department of Justice

This was a criminal case, not a declaration of war. Venezuelan leaders were made fugitives of U.S. law, with legal frameworks for extradition and prosecution—not military overthrow. Department of Justice

Additional related prosecutions have occurred, such as Hugo Carvajal, a former Venezuelan military intelligence head, pleading guilty in a Manhattan court for narco-terrorism and drug trafficking. The Guardian

2. Sanctions and Pressure Are Not Warfare

For years prior to any military action, the United States used economic and diplomatic pressure against the Venezuelan government. These included:

• Long-standing U.S. sanctions under statutes like the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act and targeted measures against Venezuelan officials and networks. Wikipedia

• Expanded reward offers for Maduro’s arrest, reaching $50 million by August 2025 on allegations of drug trafficking and criminal collaboration. Reuters

• Designations of Venezuelan criminal networks such as the Cartel of the Suns as terrorist groups by U.S. authorities. Wikipedia

Sanctions and designations can be coercive and impactful, but they are economic statecraft, not military conflict. If sanctions alone were “war,” the U.S. would technically be at war with dozens of countries simultaneously—a clearly untenable definition.

3. Prior U.S. Actions Did Not Constitute War

Before January 2026, U.S. operations in and near Venezuelan territory—such as naval seizures of oil tankers, anti-drug interdictions at sea, and covert operations—did not rise to the level of an open, sustained military campaign against the Venezuelan state:

• Oil tanker seizures off Venezuela’s coast were justified under sanctions enforcement and anti-smuggling laws, not declarations of war. The Washington Post+1

• The Trump administration publicly acknowledged authorizing CIA covert operations inside Venezuela aimed at counter-drug objectives. AP News

While these actions increased pressure on the Maduro government and raised legal and ethical debate, they remain distinct from full military invasion or occupation.

4. A War Requires Sustained Military Engagement — Which Did Not Occur Until 2026

By common historical and legal definitions, a war involves sustained combat, substantial troop deployments, widespread military operations, and objectives beyond limited tactical strikes. Prior to early January 2026, that was not the U.S. posture toward Venezuela.

However, very recent events have shifted that context:

• In early January 2026, the United States launched military strikes inside Venezuela, including against Caracas and sites such as airbases and military complexes, followed by the reported capture of President Maduro and his wife by U.S. forces. AP News+1

• The U.S. now appears to be exercising control over Venezuela’s governance and territory, at least temporarily, marking a significant escalation. euronews

These developments do represent a dramatic use of force, potentially constituting the sort of interstate military action that critics have warned about. But this escalation postdates the period commonly referenced in debates about Trump’s earlier Venezuela policy—meaning the historical record before 2026 remains distinct from a “regime-change war.”

5. Rhetoric Is Not the Same as Military Reality

It is true that senior U.S. officials, including President Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, publicly urged Maduro’s removal and framed his government as illegitimate. Prominent opposition figures also called for change and praised U.S. efforts. Reuters

But expressed preferences for who should lead a foreign country do not, by themselves, constitute a war. Diplomatic hostility, public criticism, and sanctions are political tools, not military campaigns.

For decades, U.S. presidents have stated preferences about leadership in many countries (e.g., North Korea, Iran, Cuba) without engaging in war. Conflating rhetorical preferences with kinetic military campaigns blurs important distinctions in foreign policy analysis.

6. The Difference Between Limited Use of Force and a Regime-Change War

A true regime-change war involves:

• a sustained campaign of military engagement,

• wide geographical spread,

• high troop commitment,

• an explicit strategic objective of overthrowing and replacing a government through force.

The U.S. conflicts in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan fit that definition:

• Vietnam saw over half a million U.S. troops at peak and a decade of combat.

• Iraq included invasion, regime collapse, occupation, and nation-building.

• Afghanistan was a 20-year commitment of troops and resources.

None of these elements characterized the United States’ earlier policy toward Venezuela prior to 2026.

Conclusion: Accuracy Matters

Before January 2026, you could accurately say:

The Trump administration pursued criminal indictments, economic sanctions, diplomatic pressure, targeted anti-drug and covert operations against the Venezuelan government. There was no sustained military invasion or occupation, and no war of the sort implied by the phrase “regime-change campaign.”

Logo for Lucian Seraphis Enterprises