Military action remains an option he refuses to close
En el cruce entre la amenaza y la diplomacia silenciosa, Donald Trump ha dejado abierta la posibilidad de una intervención militar directa en Venezuela, negándose a descartar una invasión terrestre mientras mantiene canales secretos de comunicación con Nicolás Maduro. Esta ambigüedad calculada no es un accidente: es una estrategia que busca desestabilizar al régimen caraqueño sin cerrar la puerta a una salida negociada. Mientras tanto, la operación militar estadounidense Lanza del Sur ha cobrado un costo humano que las cifras oficiales no alcanzan a cubrir, recordándonos que entre la retórica de los poderosos y la realidad de los vulnerables siempre existe una distancia que medir.
- Trump se niega a descartar una invasión terrestre a Venezuela, manteniendo deliberadamente la incertidumbre como herramienta de presión geopolítica.
- La operación Lanza del Sur ha destruido decenas de embarcaciones en el Caribe y el Pacífico, pero organizaciones independientes documentan más de 80 muertes en lo que califican como ejecuciones extrajudiciales.
- La brecha entre la narrativa oficial de Washington —que enmarca sus acciones como antinarcóticos y antiterrorismo— y los testimonios independientes abre una crisis de credibilidad difícil de ignorar.
- En noviembre, Trump y Maduro sostuvieron una llamada telefónica descrita como sorprendentemente cordial, revelando que la confrontación pública coexiste con negociaciones privadas.
- La doble estrategia de presión militar y contacto diplomático secreto mantiene a ambos gobiernos en un equilibrio inestable, sin que ninguno haya fijado aún el rumbo definitivo.
Donald Trump ha dejado en claro que considera los días de Nicolás Maduro en el poder contados, y ha hecho de esa ambigüedad una política. Cuando la periodista Dasha Burns le preguntó si descartaba una invasión terrestre a Venezuela, Trump se negó a responder en ningún sentido. El mensaje implícito fue inequívoco: la opción militar sigue sobre la mesa.
Esa postura retórica se produce en un momento en que la presencia militar estadounidense en la región ha alcanzado niveles sin precedentes. La administración Trump nunca ha reconocido la legitimidad de Maduro y lo acusa de encabezar el llamado Cartel de los Soles, una designación que convierte al propio gobierno venezolano en una organización criminal. Esa lógica se tradujo en acción concreta con el lanzamiento de la operación Lanza del Sur, una campaña que ha destruido alrededor de veinte embarcaciones sospechosas de narcotráfico en aguas del Caribe y el Pacífico. Sin embargo, organizaciones independientes reportan más de ochenta muertes en lo que describen como ejecuciones extrajudiciales, una cifra que contrasta con la narrativa oficial de Washington y expone una creciente crisis de credibilidad.
Pero debajo de la escalada pública, algo más complejo ocurre en silencio. Según fuentes citadas por The Washington Post, Trump y Maduro sostuvieron en noviembre una llamada telefónica descrita como sorprendentemente cordial. Trump dejó clara su posición —quiere a Maduro fuera del poder— pero no lanzó ultimátums ni fijó plazos. La conversación terminó con un acuerdo para seguir hablando.
Esta dualidad —operaciones militares agresivas y amenazas públicas combinadas con contacto diplomático privado— sugiere que la administración Trump persigue varias estrategias al mismo tiempo. La negativa a descartar una invasión mantiene a Maduro en vilo y advierte a los actores regionales que Washington está dispuesto a escalar. Los canales secretos, en cambio, preservan la posibilidad de un acuerdo político si alguna de las partes decide que la negociación es preferible a la confrontación. Lo que aún no está claro es si estas dos vías paralelas convergerán hacia una resolución o si una terminará por imponerse sobre la otra.
Donald Trump has made clear that Nicolás Maduro's time in power is running out, and he has deliberately left open the possibility of direct military intervention in Venezuela. In an interview published this week, when asked by journalist Dasha Burns whether he would rule out a ground invasion, Trump refused to commit either way. "I don't want to confirm it or deny it," he said, adding a jab at the outlet for even asking such a question from what he called a hostile publication. The message was unmistakable: military action remains an option.
This rhetorical posture arrives at a moment when the United States has expanded its military footprint in the region to unprecedented levels. The Trump administration has never recognized Maduro's legitimacy and accuses him of leading what it calls the Cartel of the Soles—a designation that frames the Venezuelan government itself as a criminal enterprise. That framing has translated into concrete action. Beginning in the middle of the year, Washington launched an operation called Lanza del Sur, a military campaign that has marked a sharp break from previous U.S. policy toward Caracas.
According to figures released by the American government, the operation has destroyed approximately twenty vessels suspected of involvement in drug trafficking across the Caribbean and Pacific waters. But independent organizations have challenged this accounting. They report that the operation has resulted in more than eighty deaths in what they characterize as extrajudicial killings—actions that the U.S. government justifies under the banner of counterterrorism and narcotics enforcement. The gap between Washington's official narrative and independent documentation points to a widening credibility problem.
Yet beneath the escalating rhetoric and military posturing, something more complicated is happening. Both governments have maintained quiet channels of communication. According to sources cited by The Washington Post, Trump and Maduro spoke by telephone in November in what was described as a surprisingly cordial exchange. Trump made his position clear: he wants Maduro out of power. But he did not issue ultimatums or set deadlines. Instead, the call ended with an agreement to continue talking—a gesture that sits in stark tension with the public confrontation dominating the relationship.
This duality—aggressive military operations and public threats paired with private diplomatic contact—suggests that the Trump administration is pursuing multiple strategies simultaneously. The refusal to rule out invasion serves a purpose: it keeps Maduro off balance and signals to regional actors that Washington is willing to escalate. At the same time, the secret calls preserve a channel for negotiation, should either side decide that a political settlement is preferable to further confrontation. What remains unclear is whether these parallel tracks will eventually converge toward a resolution or whether one will ultimately overwhelm the other.
Citações Notáveis
I don't want to confirm it or deny it— Donald Trump, on whether he would rule out a ground invasion of Venezuela
Trump expressed his desire that the Venezuelan leader leave power, but avoided setting deadlines or making direct threats— Sources cited by The Washington Post, describing the November call between Trump and Maduro
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
When Trump says Maduro's days are numbered but won't confirm or deny military action, what is he actually signaling?
He's keeping every option alive while avoiding the legal and political constraints that come with a direct threat. If he says "we will invade," that's a declaration. If he says "we won't," he loses leverage. By refusing to answer, he maintains maximum ambiguity.
But doesn't that ambiguity cut both ways? Doesn't it also leave Maduro room to prepare?
It does. But Trump seems to be betting that the psychological pressure—the not knowing—is more destabilizing than a clear threat would be. And he has the military operations themselves as proof that he's serious.
Those operations have killed over eighty people. How does that fit with the secret phone calls?
That's the contradiction at the heart of this. You can't simultaneously wage a covert war and negotiate in good faith. Unless the goal isn't actually to remove Maduro through force, but to weaken him enough that he agrees to leave on terms Washington finds acceptable.
So the military campaign is leverage for the negotiation?
Possibly. Or it's two different factions within the administration pursuing different strategies, and nobody's fully in control of the outcome. The cordial November call suggests someone in Trump's circle thinks diplomacy is still possible.
What does Maduro gain from taking that call?
He gets to assess whether the threat is real or theater. He gets to buy time. And he gets to tell his own people that he's willing to engage, that he hasn't completely lost the diplomatic game. For a leader under siege, that matters.