Senior figures in the Republican Party have swiftly moved to clarify and, in some cases, contradict former President Donald Trump's claim that the United States will directly run Venezuela during a political transition. This follows a dramatic US military operation that captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and brought him to the US to face federal charges.
Rubio Defends Operation Amid Legal Scrutiny
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio made the rounds on American Sunday political talk shows to defend the audacious capture of Maduro and his wife in the early hours of Saturday. The operation has been labelled illegal by critics, and the White House has yet to detail how it would administer the South American nation.
When pressed repeatedly on whether the US would run Venezuela, Rubio emphasised American "leverage" over the country. Appearing on ABC, he stated the US expects the action to "lead to results" and is "hopeful that it does" for both the Venezuelan people and US national interests. He argued the goal was to "set the conditions" to end Venezuela's status as a "narco-trafficking paradise" aligned with US adversaries like Iran and Hezbollah.
However, when ABC anchor George Stephanopoulos directly questioned the legal authority for the US to run Venezuela, Rubio sidestepped, replying: "I explained to you what our goals are and how we’re going to use the leverage to make it happen."
Contradictions Emerge from Trump's Florida Press Conference
The need for clarification stemmed from Trump's comments at a press conference in Florida on Saturday. Standing with officials including Rubio, Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Joint Chiefs Chairman Dan Caine, Trump said the US would run Venezuela "with a group" and would be "designating various people" in charge.
Trump also claimed that Maduro's vice-president, Delcy Rodríguez—now considered interim president in Caracas—had spoken to Rubio and promised cooperation, adding "she really doesn’t have a choice." Rodríguez later appeared on Venezuelan state television, sharply criticising the US and insisting the country "will never again be anyone’s colony".
On Sunday, Trump threatened Rodríguez, warning she would "pay a very big price, probably bigger than Maduro" if she didn't comply. In an interview with The Atlantic, he appeared to frame US goals as regime change, stating "rebuilding there and regime change, anything you want to call it, is better than what you have right now."
Republican Senators Express Uncertainty and Lay Down Demands
Other prominent Republicans also distanced themselves from the notion of direct US control. Senator Tom Cotton, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said there were "still a lot of questions to be answered" about Venezuela's future. When asked who was running the country, he responded, "Who is not running Venezuela is Maduro."
Cotton, who said the US does not recognise Rodríguez as legitimate, outlined American demands: stop drug and weapons trafficking, and expel Cuban, Iranian, and Islamic radical influences.
Senator Jim Jordan, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, was equally vague. Asked on CNN what Trump meant about the group behind him running Venezuela, Jordan admitted, "We do not know exactly what that means." Regarding next steps, he simply said, "We’ll see." He expressed trust in Trump, Rubio, and Hegseth to make "the best decisions."
This prompted Democratic Congressman Jim Himes to accuse Jordan of "giving the game away," suggesting the Republican-controlled Congress would not check executive power, and he condemned the intervention as an "imperial adventure".
Meanwhile, Rubio defended the limited scope of the capture operation, questioning the feasibility of removing more of Maduro's inner circle. "We got the top priority, the number one person on the list," he told CBS, arguing that a broader mission would have provoked greater international outcry.
