On November 25, 2025, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro stood before a sea of supporters during a government-organized civic-military rally in Caracas, defiantly holding onto power despite mounting pressure from the United States and its allies. The rally, marked by patriotic fervor and the waving of national flags, symbolized Maduro’s enduring grip on Venezuela, even as international calls for his departure grew louder and more urgent.
The past months have seen an extraordinary escalation in U.S. military posturing. According to POLITICO, President Donald Trump has amassed an unprecedented naval force in the Caribbean, including the formidable aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford, which is capable of launching nearly 200 Tomahawk missiles at land targets in the region. This show of strength is part of a broader strategy to pressure Maduro, whom Trump has labeled a "narco-terrorist dictator," to step down and leave the country—possibly for Turkey, as some speculate.
Yet, for all the saber-rattling, the reality on the ground is far more complicated. Despite the presence of guided missile cruisers, nuclear-powered submarines, and the world’s most powerful aircraft carrier, no sizable American ground force is currently staged in the region for an invasion. As POLITICO reports, the U.S. has only 2,200 Marines nearby, and there’s no movement to reinforce them. Military analysts suggest that a full-scale invasion would require at least 50,000 troops, including 20,000 soldiers—numbers that are simply not in place.
Mark Cancian, a retired Marine colonel and co-author of a Center for Strategic and International Studies analysis, told POLITICO, “The United States does not have the ground forces needed for an invasion. The Venezuelan ground forces number some 90,000 including the army, marines and National Guard. The United States has only 2,200 Marines nearby, and there’s no movement to reinforce them.”
Despite these logistical hurdles, Trump has refused to rule out the possibility of a ground invasion. In a special episode of “The Conversation” podcast with POLITICO’s Dasha Burns on December 9, 2025, he declared that Maduro’s “days are numbered” and hinted at potential military operations in neighboring countries like Mexico and Colombia, targeting drug trafficking networks. However, insiders quickly dismissed the likelihood of such operations, with one source close to the White House stating, “This has a 99.9 percent chance of not happening. But leaving that .01 percent chance on the table will bring people to the table.”
The tough talk is nothing new for Trump, who has made open threats against adversaries a hallmark of his governing style. Yet, as POLITICO notes, he has also worked hard to cultivate an image as a peacemaker, making his push for peace deals somewhat at odds with his threats to attack three separate countries in the Western Hemisphere. Steve Bannon, the former White House chief strategist and influential figure in the MAGA movement, described the current approach as “like the Monroe Doctrine 5.0.” He added, “The naval buildup puts additional pressure on Maduro to surrender and do what Trump wants him to do, which is to go to Turkey, leave the country.”
But Maduro is not easily intimidated. According to The Hill, he is betting that internal divisions over Venezuela will deepen, that narratives of alleged war crimes will gain traction in the U.S. Congress, and that his victimhood story will garner international support. The longer the U.S. delays decisive action, the more emboldened Maduro becomes. He has already demonstrated his ability to resist and overcome pressure from Washington, having weathered sanctions, international condemnation, and even being labeled a drug trafficker and a threat to U.S. national security during Trump’s first term. Despite these efforts, Maduro clung to power, and as sanctions were eased, his regime regained what some critics call “undeserved credibility.”
Recently, Maduro celebrated after announcing a phone call with the U.S. president—a move that, according to The Hill, “empowered Maduro, weakened the narrative of strength and was perceived as a sign of U.S. doubt and division.” This high-level communication has only reinforced Maduro’s resolve, as he plays for time, waiting for U.S. resolve to weaken.
For some observers, the solution is clear: more decisive action. Arturo McFields, an exiled journalist and former Nicaraguan ambassador to the Organization of American States, argues in The Hill that “land strikes must begin soon, with clear objectives and measurable results.” He points to Operation Just Cause in Panama and Operation Midnight Hammer in Iran as examples of what can be achieved without committing to a long-term war. McFields insists, “Once Maduro and his cronies see their military and economic power weakened, it will be a great time for a final phone call and to buy a one-way ticket to Moscow or Ankara so the people can pave the way for the legitimate government of Venezuela.”
Yet, the appetite for military intervention is far from universal. The MAGA base itself is divided, with some Republicans urging caution and others pushing for stronger action. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a staunch Trump ally, told POLITICO, “I don’t think we need them right now,” referring to ground troops. Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) was even more direct: “I’m not a supporter of ground troops. I’m not a supporter of regime change forced by the United States. I mean, if Maduro decides to go of his own accord, fine. But I’ve never been a supporter of regime change.”
Public opinion is also firmly against escalation. A recent CBS News poll found that 70 percent of Americans oppose military action in Venezuela, highlighting the deep skepticism among the public about the merits and risks of intervention. Memories of the long wars in Iraq and Afghanistan loom large, with many wary of entangling the U.S. in another costly, open-ended conflict.
Even if the decision were made to move forward, military experts warn that any ground force preparation would take months and require staging in a neighboring country—a process that would be highly visible and politically sensitive. There are also concerns about the potential for guerrilla warfare in Venezuela’s jungled interior if loyalist forces decided to fight it out, raising the specter of a protracted and bloody conflict.
For now, the U.S. strategy appears to rely on a combination of naval pressure, targeted airstrikes, and diplomatic maneuvering, all designed to convince Maduro that his time is up. As one former defense official told POLITICO, “The Trump administration was hoping to scare Maduro into departing Venezuela, but if that doesn’t work, the remaining military options are unappealing. And if Maduro does indeed depart, by choice or by force, then it leaves open the question of whether U.S. forces will be needed to secure the country, and for how long.”
With China and Russia not actively supporting Maduro as of December 2025, the window for U.S. action could be closing. But as internal divisions persist in Washington and public support remains elusive, Maduro continues to play for time, betting that the U.S. will blink first. Whether Trump will escalate further or seek another path remains to be seen, but one thing is clear: the standoff over Venezuela is far from over, and the stakes—for both countries—could not be higher.