On October 16, 2025, President Donald Trump confirmed a dramatic escalation in U.S. policy toward Venezuela, publicly acknowledging that he had authorized the Central Intelligence Agency to conduct covert operations inside the South American country. The revelation, reported by outlets including Al Jazeera and The New York Times, marks a significant turning point in the long-simmering standoff between Washington and the government of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
During a tense White House press conference, Trump fielded questions about the secret CIA authorization exposed by the Times. His response was blunt. “They have emptied their prisons into the United States,” Trump declared, reiterating his claim that Venezuela had released criminals and people from mental institutions, sending them across the U.S. border. “They came in through the border. They have allowed thousands and thousands of prisoners, people from mental institutions, insane asylums emptied out into the United States,” he continued. “They are the worst abuser.” According to Al Jazeera, Trump also accused Venezuela of being a major source of narcotics entering the U.S., vowing, “We’re going to stop them by land also.”
The president’s remarks followed a series of U.S. military strikes on small vessels off Venezuela’s Caribbean coast since early September. These attacks, which have killed at least 27 people, were justified by the Trump administration as part of a campaign to disrupt drug trafficking networks allegedly linked to Maduro’s government. A video released by Trump on October 14 showed a missile strike setting a boat ablaze and killing six people. “When they’re loaded up with drugs, they’re fair game,” Trump said, adding that “fentanyl dust” was found on the destroyed boats, according to Al Jazeera.
Yet, the administration has not provided lawmakers with concrete evidence that the targeted vessels were actually transporting narcotics. As reported by Newsmax, two U.S. officials familiar with the matter—who spoke on condition of anonymity—confirmed that Congress had not received proof substantiating the military’s claims. The lack of transparency has fueled concerns among both Republican and Democratic lawmakers. Some Republicans have pressed the White House for details on the legal justification and scope of the operations, while Democrats have argued that the strikes violate U.S. and international law and risk inflaming tensions in the region.
In a memo to Congress, the Trump administration justified the attacks by stating that the United States was in a “non-international armed conflict” with designated terrorist organizations, and that the president had directed the Pentagon to “conduct operations against them pursuant to the law of armed conflict.” Notably, groups like Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan criminal organization, have been labeled as “foreign terrorist organizations” by the U.S. government. However, legal experts cited by Al Jazeera pointed out that such designations do not automatically grant authority for military strikes under international law, especially in cases where the targets are not recognized as combatants.
For Venezuela, the CIA authorization and U.S. military actions represent a grave violation of sovereignty. The Maduro government swiftly condemned the move, accusing Washington of breaking international law and the United Nations Charter. “The purpose of U.S. actions is to justify a regime-change operation and take control of our national resources,” the Venezuelan government said in a statement, as reported by Al Jazeera.
Trump’s rhetoric and actions reflect a broader campaign to pressure Maduro’s government, which the U.S. has long branded as illegitimate. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has called Maduro a “narcoterrorist,” and the Trump administration has put a $50 million bounty on the Venezuelan leader’s head for information leading to his arrest and conviction on federal drug trafficking charges. Diplomatic talks between the two countries came to a halt after Maduro refused to relinquish power, further fueling the confrontation.
The military buildup in the Caribbean is unmistakable. According to The New York Times, there are now 10,000 American troops stationed in the region, along with Marines aboard amphibious assault ships. On October 14, B-52 long-range bombers flew near Venezuela’s coast, sending a clear signal of potential imminent action. Numerous naval assets and F-35 stealth fighters are also present, heightening the sense that the standoff could soon escalate into open conflict.
The scope of the CIA’s new authority is sweeping. The order allows the agency to conduct a range of covert operations in Venezuela and throughout the Caribbean, including possible action against President Maduro himself. While it remains unclear whether such operations are already underway or still being planned, the implications are profound. As noted by OutKick, the CIA’s Special Activities Center—sometimes staffed by former Delta Force and SEAL Team 6 operators—could potentially be tasked with lethal missions inside Venezuela. The precedent for such black operations exists; the raid that killed Osama bin Laden, for instance, was conducted under similar legal authority.
Despite the administration’s aggressive posture, U.S. intelligence agencies have repeatedly contradicted Trump’s claims about Venezuela’s role in drug trafficking and criminal infiltration. In May 2025, a declassified report found no evidence linking Maduro’s government to organizations like Tren de Aragua, undermining the president’s narrative. Nevertheless, Trump has continued to insist that Venezuela poses a direct threat to U.S. national security, invoking wartime powers such as the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to justify his administration’s actions.
For now, the situation remains volatile. Trump has signaled that, with maritime drug smuggling “almost totally stopped,” his administration is “certainly looking at land now because we’ve got the sea very well under control.” The prospect of U.S. troops or special forces conducting operations on Venezuelan soil looms large, raising the stakes for both countries and the entire region.
The escalating confrontation between the United States and Venezuela has drawn a spectrum of responses in Washington. While some lawmakers support the administration’s tough stance against what they see as a dangerous regime, others warn that the lack of clear legal justification and the risk of unintended consequences could plunge the region into deeper instability. The coming weeks may prove decisive, as both sides brace for what could become the most serious U.S.-Venezuela crisis in recent memory.
With covert operations now officially on the table and military assets massed in the Caribbean, the world watches anxiously to see whether this high-stakes game will result in regime change, open conflict, or a new chapter in the enduring standoff between Washington and Caracas.