In a week marked by high-stakes maneuvers and escalating rhetoric, the United States has dramatically intensified its global interventions, with a particular focus on Venezuela. According to The Wall Street Journal, on December 22, 2025, U.S. authorities deployed at least ten CV-22 Osprey rotary-wing aircraft—used by Special Operations Forces—to the Caribbean, alongside several C-17 cargo planes ferrying troops and equipment to Puerto Rico. These moves, shrouded in secrecy regarding the specific nature of the personnel and materiel involved, signal a significant uptick in pressure on Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro.
The military buildup is just the latest in a series of actions by the Trump administration, which has made no secret of its desire to see Maduro ousted from power. As reported by The Wall Street Journal, the White House has already imposed a blockade on oil tankers entering and leaving Venezuela, cutting off a critical source of revenue for the embattled government. The deployment of elite units—drawn from Fort Campbell’s 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment and the 101st Airborne Division, as well as Cannon’s 27th Special Operations Regiment—underscores the seriousness of the U.S. posture. These units are renowned for their expertise in high-risk infiltration, extraction, and combat support missions, suggesting that Washington is prepared to escalate its involvement if necessary.
But Venezuela is hardly the only country feeling the heat. As detailed by Bhaskar English, the Trump administration has adopted a multi-pronged approach to global intervention, ranging from military deployments to economic warfare. In 2019, Trump recognized opposition leader Juan Guaidó as Venezuela’s interim president, openly challenging Maduro’s legitimacy. Since returning to office, Trump has accused Maduro of facilitating drug trafficking into the U.S. and has gone so far as to authorize the CIA to take direct action to remove him. The U.S. military, meanwhile, is reportedly seizing Venezuelan oil tankers—an aggressive tactic that has further strained relations between the two countries.
The stakes are high for Maduro, who now faces a $50 million bounty placed on his head by the U.S. government. "The White House is significantly increasing pressure on Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro," The Wall Street Journal noted, highlighting the administration’s willingness to use both overt and covert measures to achieve its aims.
Elsewhere in Latin America, Washington’s hand is equally visible. In Brazil, Trump has thrown his support behind former President Jair Bolsonaro, a close ally, by imposing a staggering 50% tariff on goods from the government of current President Lula da Silva. This, according to Bhaskar English, is the largest U.S. tariff ever levied against a single country. The Trump administration has also targeted Brazilian Supreme Court Judge Alexandre de Moraes with visa restrictions and economic sanctions in response to rulings perceived as unfavorable to Bolsonaro. The message is clear: any action against Bolsonaro will be met with American pressure.
The ripple effects of U.S. intervention have been felt in Honduras as well. The November 30, 2025, presidential election saw Trump openly backing candidate Nasry Asfura, warning that U.S. economic aid could be jeopardized if his preferred candidate did not prevail. The election, marred by delays, technical glitches, and allegations of rigging, ultimately ended with Asfura’s victory—a result the opposition has refused to accept. During the campaign, Trump issued a pardon for former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez, who had been accused of large-scale drug trafficking in the U.S. and was closely tied to Asfura’s party. This move, widely interpreted as a calculated political gesture, further cemented perceptions of American interference in the country’s electoral process.
Argentina, too, has been swept up in the wave of U.S. assertiveness. Ahead of the October 26, 2025, parliamentary elections, Trump warned President Javier Milei that failure to secure victory would result in harsh measures from Washington. The threat sent shockwaves through Argentina’s markets and deepened political divisions. In the end, Milei’s party emerged as the largest in parliament—a result many observers attribute, at least in part, to the pressure exerted by the U.S.
Meanwhile, in Myanmar, the U.S. faces a different kind of challenge. The country’s upcoming elections, scheduled to begin December 28, 2025, are overshadowed by military rule and widespread exclusion of opposition figures. The United Nations has dismissed the elections as a sham, citing the absence of meaningful competition and the ongoing civil conflict. Here, the U.S. finds itself at odds with China, which is providing support to the military government of General Min Aung Hlaing by supplying voter lists, technology, and international observers. China’s interest in Myanmar is strategic: the country serves as a critical gateway to the Indian Ocean, hosting major infrastructure projects such as ports, oil and gas pipelines, and roads. These projects have been stalled by the civil war, prompting Beijing to back the military in a bid to protect its investments.
For the Trump administration, the message is unambiguous. Whether through economic sanctions, diplomatic threats, or the projection of military force, the U.S. is prepared to use every tool at its disposal to advance its interests. As Bhaskar English put it, "With these steps, the US wants to show that it will not spare governments that go against its interests. Whether it is economic pressure, diplomatic threats, or a display of military might, the Trump administration seems ready to adopt every method."
This assertive posture has not gone unnoticed on the world stage. Critics argue that such interventions undermine the sovereignty of other nations and risk fueling instability. Supporters, on the other hand, contend that strong action is necessary to counter threats and promote democratic values. The debate is far from settled, and as the U.S. continues to flex its muscles, governments around the world are left to ponder their next moves.
Back in Washington, the administration’s actions have sparked heated discussion. Some lawmakers applaud the president’s willingness to take decisive action, while others warn of the dangers inherent in overreach. The courts, too, have found themselves drawn into the fray, particularly in disputes over tariffs and executive authority. As the global chessboard shifts, one thing is clear: the United States, under President Trump, is determined to shape the world order—by force, by fiat, or by the sheer weight of its influence.
From the Caribbean to Southeast Asia, the reverberations of American intervention are being felt as never before. Whether these moves will yield the desired outcomes—or provoke unintended consequences—remains to be seen. But for now, the world is watching, and Washington is calling the shots.
