The President’s military intervention in Venezuela presents a new challenge to his capacity to maintain unity within a fractious Republican coalition in a difficult election year, one that may be dominated by domestic issues such as health care and the cost of living.
Although most Republicans initially rallied behind the president following the dramatic U.S. operation to capture a target and bring him to New York for prosecution, indications of discomfort emerged from various factions of the party. Specifically, Trump’s remarks about the U.S. preparing to “run” Venezuela have sparked worries that he is departing from the “America First” doctrine that has long set him apart from conventional Republicans and propelled his political ascent.
“This is the same Washington playbook that we are so sick and tired of that doesn’t serve the American people, but actually serves the big corporations, the banks and the oil executives,” stated a Georgia Representative, a former Trump ally, during an interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday.
These apprehensions were echoed by individuals not linked to the party’s far-right wing.
In a statement, Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, a moderate who is among the most endangered Republicans in the upcoming November midterms, said, “the only country that the United States of America should be ‘running’ is the United States of America.”
Such remarks highlight the delicate relationship between Trump and his Republican colleagues at the start of an election year where the party could lose its congressional majority. While the president’s authority is still unquestioned, the firm control he has exerted over the party has encountered rare tests in recent months. Groups of Republicans have united to push Trump to release certain information. Others have openly urged him to treat other matters with greater seriousness.
Trump’s assertive vision for U.S. supremacy
Avoiding entrapment in open-ended foreign engagements that detract from domestic priorities is a cornerstone of Trump’s political identity. For example, in a 2016 Republican primary debate, he labeled the Iraq war a “big, fat mistake.”
However, on Saturday, Trump stated he was “not afraid of boots on the ground” in Venezuela if required, presenting his moves as focused on American safety and security. He outlined a forceful vision of U.S. preeminence in the Western Hemisphere, telling reporters it was crucial to “surround ourselves with good neighbors.”
Yet, similar to the Iraq War, a president’s initial optimism following a bold military strike can later confront harsher realities that erode support at home.
In Venezuela, American forces might once again face danger as Trump hints at further potential military actions. A prolonged conflict could exacerbate the regional refugee crisis, which the White House has attempted to curb through tighter border security. Furthermore, uncertainties persist regarding the level of cooperation from remaining Venezuelan officials or the feasibility of accessing the nation’s oil reserves to achieve Trump’s aim of increasing energy extraction with Maduro removed from power.
Trump’s weekend statements about reviving Venezuela’s oil sector align with some of his initial criticisms of the Iraq War management. In a 2013 speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference, Trump argued the U.S. should “take” Iraq’s oil and “pay ourselves back.”
Discontent with the Iraq War’s execution aided significant Democratic victories in the 2006 elections and helped pave the way for Barack Obama’s presidential win two years later. Considering the negative associations with those conflicts, Trump’s supporters maintain that this weekend’s actions in Venezuela are distinct.
“Venezuela looks nothing like Libya,” the Secretary of State said on “Meet the Press.” “It looks nothing like Iraq. It looks nothing like Afghanistan. It looks nothing like the Middle East other than the Iranian agents that are running through there plotting against America, okay?”
Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Tom Cotton contended that the 1989 removal of Manuel Noriega in Panama is a more apt parallel.
“That was a successful operation,” Cotton remarked on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “I believe, in the long run, this will be too.”
Nevertheless, facing some criticism over the U.S. assuming broad responsibility for Venezuela’s management, Senator Rubio proposed a more restrained role. He indicated Washington would not oversee the daily administration of the South American nation, aside from enforcing a current “oil quarantine” on Venezuela.
Limited organized GOP resistance to the operations
There is little evidence of a strong, coordinated opposition to Trump’s Venezuela policy forming among Republicans. Rather, numerous legislators seem to be allowing the GOP administration some leeway, offering only cautions at most.
Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, who is up for a potentially tough reelection this year, labeled Maduro a “narco-terrorist and international drug trafficker” who should face trial, while also stating “Congress should have been informed about the operation earlier and needs to be involved as this situation evolves.”
Even Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, a frequent critic of military interventions, did not directly oppose Trump’s moves. He posted on social media that “time will tell if regime change in Venezuela is successful without significant monetary or human cost.”
Many Democrats condemned Trump’s actions in Venezuela, and the Democratic National Committee promptly tried to fundraise by attacking “another unconstitutional war from Trump.”
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., dismissed the administration’s claim that it was fighting drug crimes, stating on social media that the White House is actually concentrating on “oil and regime change” in an attempt “to distract from Epstein + skyrocketing healthcare costs.” Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said the operation fit an “old and obvious pattern” where an “unpopular president — failing on the economy and losing his grip on power at home — decides to launch a war for regime change abroad.”