MIAMI, FL -The expiration of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Venezuelans in April 2025 is just another symptom of the broader crisis plaguing Venezuela. The Trump administration, under the firm leadership of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, has been methodically restoring law and order by deporting criminal illegal aliens and gang members. The process has been carried out humanely and with respect, as it should be. But now, the conversation is shifting beyond immigration—toward the fate of Venezuela itself and whether the United States should wield more than just economic sanctions to deal with the Maduro dictatorship.
Congresswoman María Elvira Salazar recently made a striking statement: “Maduro has to go! Trump is the only force to get him out.” Some will read this as a call for diplomatic pressure, others as a bold nod to more forceful measures. While direct military intervention is not something to take lightly, can we truly dismiss the idea?
Venezuela: A Hub for America’s Enemies
Unlike Ukraine, Venezuela has directly aligned itself with our geopolitical adversaries. Russia, China, Iran, and Cuba have all entrenched themselves within its borders, using it as a strategic foothold in the Western Hemisphere. Venezuela is not merely a failed socialist experiment; it has become a proxy state for regimes that openly seek to undermine the United States. A military intervention would not be about a land grab, nor about policing the world—it would be about securing our own backyard and ensuring that a hostile regime does not continue to flourish just miles from U.S. soil.
This is not Iraq or Afghanistan. Venezuela is a nation where the people are desperate for liberation, where the government is actively colluding with enemies of freedom, and where a tyrant has tightened his grip with no regard for human rights. The suffering of innocent Venezuelans under Maduro’s iron fist is undeniable.
The Case for “Everything on the Table”
Trump has always been a president who believes in strength. He knows that diplomacy works best when backed by leverage, and that leverage does not have to mean immediate boots on the ground. The administration has already demonstrated an aggressive stance on border security and law enforcement. But when it comes to Venezuela, why should we limit our options?
Would it be a fair trade—Ukraine for Venezuela? If the world is willing to risk everything for Kyiv, why is Caracas off-limits? Is there a greater moral justification for defending a European democracy than for liberating a nation in our own hemisphere from a narco-dictatorship that harbors our enemies?
While a direct military invasion would carry severe consequences, keeping it as a strategic possibility may be necessary. China has invested heavily in Venezuela’s resources, and Russia has military advisors stationed there. A conflict could trigger wider repercussions, escalating into a global showdown. However, removing Maduro by other means—covert operations, support for internal resistance, or precision strikes against key infrastructure—could be feasible alternatives.
America First—But With Strategic Vision
As a Cuban-American, I understand better than most the devastation wrought by socialist regimes. My family saw it in Havana, and we see it again in Caracas. Trump has always promised to put America First, but that does not mean turning a blind eye to hostile regimes in our hemisphere. The U.S. must act in a way that prioritizes our interests while also standing for freedom and security.
It is not about conquest, nor about reckless interventionism. It is about protecting the innocent, ensuring regional stability, and making it clear that the Western Hemisphere is not open territory for America’s adversaries. If diplomacy fails, and if all else fails—then, and only then—should military action be on the table.
The Trump administration has shown that it is capable of making the tough decisions. Now, the real question is: will we let Venezuela remain a safe haven for our enemies, or will we finally put an end to its tyranny once and for all?
