Secretary of State Marco Rubio used his Senate testimony to strongly defend the U.S. operation that removed Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, while outlining Washington’s strategy for stabilizing the country and shaping its political future. The hearing offered the most detailed public explanation yet of the administration’s actions and its long-term objectives in Venezuela.
Rubio characterized the Maduro operation as a targeted and strategic intervention rather than an act of war. He told lawmakers the move was necessary to protect U.S. national security interests and to prevent further instability in the Western Hemisphere. According to Rubio, the situation in Venezuela has improved since Maduro’s removal, describing the early results as “good and decent progress” under interim leadership.
A major focus of Rubio’s testimony was the administration’s emphasis on avoiding chaos in the aftermath of Maduro’s ouster. He said the immediate priority was stabilization—ensuring basic governance, public order, and the continued functioning of essential institutions. Rubio warned that a power vacuum or internal conflict would have posed a far greater risk than decisive action.
Rubio also addressed concerns about future military involvement. While he said there are no current plans for additional military operations, he declined to rule out the use of force entirely if U.S. interests or regional stability were threatened. That position drew sharp questioning from some senators, who pressed him on the legal authority for such actions and the risks of prolonged U.S. involvement.
Another key element of Rubio’s testimony involved Venezuela’s oil sector and economic recovery. He explained that the U.S. has allowed limited oil sales under strict oversight, with revenues directed toward essential services rather than political elites. Rubio framed the policy as a temporary measure designed to prevent economic collapse while maintaining leverage over the new authorities in Caracas.
He also pointed to recent changes in Venezuela’s hydrocarbons laws, which he said could eventually open the door to foreign investment. However, Rubio acknowledged that investor confidence remains fragile and that meaningful reform will take time. Economic recovery, he argued, is essential to preventing mass migration and restoring regional stability.
Looking ahead, Rubio outlined a three-phase approach for Venezuela’s future: stabilization, recovery, and democratic transition. He emphasized that the U.S. is not seeking to impose a government but instead aims to support conditions that allow Venezuelans to determine their own political path through credible democratic processes.
The testimony drew mixed reactions from lawmakers. Supporters praised Rubio for defending what they see as a bold and successful operation, arguing it sent a clear signal to authoritarian regimes. Critics, however, questioned the precedent it sets and warned about the long-term consequences for U.S. foreign policy norms.
Rubio closed by insisting that the United States is not at war with Venezuela and remains committed to diplomacy alongside pressure. The hearing made clear that while the immediate phase of the Maduro operation has ended, Venezuela will remain a central and closely watched issue in U.S. foreign policy in the months ahead.
Watch video below :
