(MENAFN- The Rio Times) As the world watches U.S. foreign policy under President Donald Trump's second term, a pivotal moment unfolded aboard Air Force One. When pressed by journalists on launching military strikes inside Venezuela, Trump delivered a resolute "No."

This declaration quells fears of escalation in a region already fraught with instability, but it reveals deeper layers of strategy, influence, and global stakes that expats and international observers should grasp.

At the heart is Venezuela's ongoing crisis under Nicolás Maduro's socialist regime, which has gripped power since 2013 after Hugo Chávez's death.

Once oil-rich with over 300 billion barrels in reserves-the world's largest-the country has spiraled into hyperinflation, mass exodus (over 7 million refugees since 2014), and allegations of rigged elections, including the disputed July 2024 vote.

Maduro's government, accused of harboring the Cartel of the Suns-a military-linked drug network-has drawn U.S. ire, especially amid America's fentanyl epidemic, which killed more than 107,000 in 2024 alone.



Trump's administration frames its Caribbean buildup as an anti-narcotics push, deploying F-35 jets to Puerto Rico in September 2025 and the massive USS Gerald R. Ford carrier group by late October.
US pressure revives Venezuela intervention debate
Strikes on suspected drug vessels have claimed at least 57 lives, disrupting sea routes. Trump also greenlit CIA covert ops, targeting Maduro's hold by empowering opposition forces, led by figures like Secretary of State Marco Rubio and CIA Director John Ratcliffe.

Motivations include claims of Venezuela releasing prisoners, even from mental institutions, who then head north, exacerbating U.S. border strains.

Behind this: a history of U.S. interventions in Latin America, from sanctions during Trump's first term to recognizing opposition leader Juan Guaidó in 2019. Yet, conservative influencers like Tucker Carlson caution against overreach.

In a compelling interview with Colonel Douglas Macgregor, Carlson highlighted how invading could mire America in another endless conflict, diverting from "America First" priorities like sealing borders and confronting Mexican cartels or Chinese chemical suppliers.

Such ventures, they argue, often enrich elites coveting Venezuela's gold and lithium while ignoring socialist policies' root failures that breed corruption and poverty.

For expats in Brazil or elsewhere, this underscores how U.S. restraint averts regional chaos, potentially involving Maduro's backers like Russia and China.

It highlights conservative prudence in avoiding quagmires, offering a path to stability through pressure, not war-eye-opening for those navigating global shifts from afar.

MENAFN31102025007421016031ID1110277856