On Sunday, January 4, President Donald Trump revealed that before the United States military operation to apprehend Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, he had informed oil companies about the impending action. This revelation came as a surprise to Congress, which was not privy to the details of the military operation that took place on Saturday, January 3.
During a conversation with reporters on Air Force One, Trump acknowledged he had consulted oil companies both before and after the operation. Upon being asked if he had provided the oil companies with a heads up about the impending action, Trump responded: “Before and after. And they want to go in, and they’re gonna do a great job for the people of Venezuela.”
This disclosure has prompted serious concerns about the administration’s priorities and decision-making process. Trump’s admission that private corporations were informed in advance, while Congress was not, diverges significantly from traditional constitutional norms regarding military operations and congressional war powers.
A spokesperson for Chevron informed ABC that the company “had NO advance notice of the recent operation.” The revelation has sparked concerns about transparency in military operations. The lack of congressional notification has raised concerns among lawmakers about constitutional questions regarding executive authority in military interventions.
Trump has been candid about his vision for Venezuela’s future, which involves a significant role for American energy companies. During a press conference, he announced that the United States would “run the country until we can do a safe, proper, and judicious transition.” He outlined plans for major U.S. oil companies to “go in, spend billions of dollars, fix the badly broken infrastructure, the oil infrastructure, and start making money for the country.”
Although Venezuela is rich in oil reserves, its petroleum industry has seen a steady decline over recent decades due to underinvestment, poor management, and international sanctions. American oil companies see Venezuela’s reserves as a potentially profitable venture. However, the restoration of the country’s oil infrastructure would necessitate a substantial capital investment and years of effort.
The president’s handling of Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado has also been under scrutiny. Trump told reporters he had not been in touch with Machado and argued “she doesn’t have the respect within the country” to lead Venezuela. Given her prominent role in the opposition movement, Machado seemed to be a logical choice to lead Venezuela’s transition.
During his conversation aboard Air Force One, Trump directed criticism toward Colombian President Gustavo Petro, who has been one of the most vocal critics of the Venezuelan operation, and issued threats against multiple countries in the Western Hemisphere and beyond.
Colombian President Petro responded to Trump’s threats by calling for Latin American nations to unite against U.S. intervention, cautioning that the region risks being “treated as a servant and slave.”
However, President Donald Trump welcomed Colombian President Gustavo Petro to the White House on Tuesday, February 3, 2026, for their first face-to-face meeting after more than a year of bitter feuding and mutual insults. The two-hour meeting struck a surprisingly amicable tone, with Trump telling reporters they “got along very well” and Petro sharing photos on social media showing Trump’s warm inscriptions on gifts, including a signed copy of “The Art of the Deal” that read “You are great.”
The meeting came after months of escalating tensions that began in January 2025 when Petro initially refused U.S. deportation flights, prompting Trump to threaten devastating tariffs and forcing Petro to back down. Relations deteriorated further when Trump accused Petro of being a “sick man” and “drug leader” following U.S. military strikes on alleged drug boats in the Caribbean, the revocation of Petro’s U.S. visa after he urged American soldiers to disobey Trump at a UN protest, and Treasury Department sanctions imposed on Petro in October 2025.
The Tuesday meeting focused on counternarcotics cooperation and border security with Venezuela, with both leaders discussing targeting high-level drug kingpins and bolstering economies along Colombia’s borders with Venezuela and Ecuador. Petro left the Oval Office with a red MAGA hat, which he modified with a pen to read “Make the Americas Great Again,” signaling a pragmatic détente between the two populist leaders just months before Petro’s term ends in August 2026.
In January, Trump also suggested that Cuba “is ready to fall” and discussed concerns about drug cartels operating in Mexico. He painted the Mexican government as incapable of controlling the cartels and hinted at possible U.S. intervention.
Trump’s threats extended to multiple nations, indicating a wider strategic approach to asserting American power in Latin America and beyond.
The Venezuelan operation signifies a major escalation in U.S. foreign policy, marking the first time in decades that American forces have undertaken such a bold military strike to remove a sitting head of state. The action harkens back to previous instances of U.S. intervention during the Cold War era, when Washington frequently supported coups and regime changes in the region. However, this operation—along with Trump’s explicit statements about managing Venezuela and exploiting its oil resources—sets it apart from historical precedents.
The international response to the operation has been immediate and largely negative, with countries across Latin America condemning what they perceive as an unlawful act of aggression. The operation has reignited longstanding concerns about American imperialism in the Western Hemisphere and raised fears that other nations could face similar actions.
The situation continues to evolve rapidly, with Trump stating that decisions about potential U.S. troop deployments in Venezuela would depend on what “the new administration—if you want to call them that” decides to do. The president’s casual dismissal of Venezuela’s sovereignty and his frank discussion of exploiting the country’s natural resources have stunned foreign policy experts and allies alike, many of whom warn that the operation sets a dangerous precedent for international relations.