On November 2, 2025, Venezuela’s political crisis took a dramatic new turn as Nobel Peace Prize winner and opposition leader Maria Corina Machado publicly called for military escalation against President Nicolás Maduro’s government. Her remarks, broadcast on Bloomberg’s ‘The Mishal Husain Show’ and echoed across international media, have ignited fierce debate both within Venezuela and on the world stage.
Machado, long a prominent figure in Venezuela’s opposition and recently thrust into the global spotlight by her Nobel honor, did not mince words. Asked whether she supported U.S. military action, she declared, “I believe the escalation that’s taking place is the only way to force Maduro to understand that it’s time to go.” According to BORNA, she insisted this was not a conventional regime change, but rather “enforcing the will of the Venezuelan people.” Machado accused Maduro of seizing power illegally in the previous year’s election, from which she herself was barred, and asserted that opposition candidate Edmundo Gonzalez Urrutia was the true victor.
The context for Machado’s statements is as volatile as it is complex. Earlier in 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump deployed a naval armada to the western Caribbean, a move Washington justified as part of a crackdown on alleged drug-smuggling operations linked to Venezuela. Since September, U.S. forces have struck what they describe as “narco-boats” off Venezuela’s coast. According to reporting by Bloomberg and Reuters, these strikes have resulted in 64 deaths and have sparked criticism from both domestic and international observers, including members of Trump’s own Republican Party who question the legality of the operations.
Yet Machado has not wavered in her support. “These strikes are about saving lives,” she told Bloomberg, placing the blame for every death squarely on Maduro. She urged the international community to “cut off drug-fueled power” and maintained that the threat of U.S. military force was “absolutely indispensable” to compel Maduro to step down. In her view, the Venezuelan opposition is ready to take over, claiming that “more than 80% of the military and police are joining and will be part of this orderly transition as soon as it starts.”
Maduro’s government has responded with predictable fury. Caracas has accused Machado of acting as a conduit for U.S. funds to so-called “fascist” anti-government groups, painting her as a front for Washington’s interference in Venezuelan affairs. Maduro himself has dismissed the U.S. drug-trafficking accusations as fabrications and described the American operations as a violation of Venezuelan sovereignty and a thinly veiled coup attempt. In the face of growing military pressure, Venezuela has sought support from allies Russia, China, and Iran to bolster its defenses.
The international dimension of the crisis deepened on November 3, 2025, when Russia ratified a strategic partnership treaty with Venezuela and publicly condemned the U.S. campaign. China, too, has vowed to defend Venezuela, underscoring the geopolitical stakes in a country that, as many commentators have pointed out, possesses vast oil reserves and occupies a strategic position in the Americas. The Latin Times and other outlets have noted that the tug-of-war over Venezuela’s future is as much about global power politics as it is about democracy or human rights.
Behind the scenes, Machado’s relationship with the Trump administration has grown increasingly close. According to an exclusive Reuters report, her team has held at least eight meetings with senior U.S. officials—including Mike Waltz, Trump’s national security adviser, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio—between January and April 2025. These discussions reportedly focused on designating the Cártel de los Soles, a shadowy drug-trafficking organization allegedly linked to the Venezuelan military, as a terrorist group. Machado herself participated in some of these meetings via video call from a secret location inside Venezuela.
Sources close to the opposition told Reuters that Machado’s camp is acutely aware of the risks associated with aligning so closely with the Trump administration. There is an ever-present fear of being seen as betraying Venezuelan interests or inviting foreign intervention. Still, they argue that after years of failed protests, negotiations, and even electoral victories that have not led to change, “what remains but supporting this?” as former U.S. ambassador Jimmy Story put it. The opposition’s ultimate goal, these sources say, remains the removal of Maduro—even if it means walking a political tightrope with potentially dire consequences.
Machado’s Nobel win in October 2025 only raised the stakes. In her acceptance speech, she dedicated the prize to “the people of Venezuela and President Donald Trump, the people of the United States, the peoples of Latin America, and the democratic nations of the world as our principal allies to achieve freedom and democracy.” Her words, reported by the Latin Times, signaled a clear intent to keep international attention—and pressure—focused on Venezuela’s plight.
Yet, as critics have pointed out, Machado’s approach is not without controversy. In her Bloomberg interview, she went so far as to claim that Hamas and Hezbollah, two groups designated as terrorist organizations by the U.S., are now operating in Caracas. These assertions, reported in Western media, have been met with skepticism and, in some quarters, outright derision. Detractors argue that such claims serve to justify foreign intervention and distract from the country’s internal problems.
The moral and strategic calculus for Machado and her allies is daunting. As David Smilde, a Venezuela expert at Tulane University, told Reuters, “If the approach succeeds, Machado could gain immense prestige among her countrymen. But failure, or any resulting U.S. military intervention that sparks instability, could leave her facing blame for both domestic and regional fallout.” The opposition’s gamble is high-stakes indeed.
Meanwhile, Maduro’s government remains defiant, buoyed by the support of Russia and China and determined to frame the crisis as a battle against imperialism and foreign meddling. The Venezuelan leader has consistently denied U.S. accusations of drug trafficking and has sought to rally nationalist sentiment in defense of the country’s sovereignty.
As the crisis deepens, ordinary Venezuelans are left to navigate a fraught landscape marked by economic hardship, political repression, and the looming threat of further escalation. The coming months will test not only the resolve of Machado and her supporters but also the willingness of the international community to intervene—or to step back and let Venezuelans shape their own destiny.
For now, the world watches as a Nobel Peace Prize laureate calls for war in the name of peace, and Venezuela’s future hangs in the balance.
