President Donald Trump’s administration has expanded U.S. military activity in the southern Caribbean and eastern Pacific, including operations the Pentagon says have struck small vessels it alleges were carrying narcotics, killing around 40 people.
The controversial strikes and an increased U.S. presence have raised legal and diplomatic questions, and come while much of Congress is out of regular session because of the ongoing federal government shutdown.
Venezuela is a northern South American country of roughly 28–30 million people and a land area larger than many U.S. states. It holds some of the world’s largest proven oil reserves, along with gold and other minerals. Decades of state-controlled oil policy, price fluctuations, and more recent corruption and sanctions have left its economy severely contracted despite this natural wealth.
Nicolás Maduro succeeded Hugo Chávez after Chávez’s death in 2013 and has maintained power through contested elections and control of key state institutions. His most recent term has been widely disputed, with opposition groups and foreign governments calling the results illegitimate. Maduro retains backing from allies such as Russia and China, while the U.S. and others have imposed sanctions and rejected his leadership.
Since September, U.S. officials have confirmed several strikes on small vessels in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific, claiming they were involved in drug trafficking. Reports cite dozens of fatalities, though independent verification has been limited. Human rights observers have urged investigations into whether the operations comply with international law.
Two U.S. B-1 Lancer bombers were also flown near the Venezuelan coast in recent days as part of training missions. U.S. officials called the flights routine, while critics described them as provocative during an already tense period.
With Congress largely out of session amid the shutdown, oversight has been limited. Several lawmakers have publicly demanded briefings on the scope of military operations and the administration’s legal rationale. Some have questioned whether the actions comply with the War Powers Resolution.
International law experts have also raised concerns about the administration’s justification for the strikes under a “non-international armed conflict” framework, warning that such use of force in international waters without transparent evidence could violate global norms.
Venezuela’s immense resource wealth and strategic location make it central to regional stability. Escalating military activity, without clear congressional authorization or substantiated evidence — risks widening the standoff and deepening humanitarian and diplomatic fallout.
