Trump and Maduro refresh a complex relationship governed by self-interest and tainted by Venezuela election fraud
In 2019, President Donald Trump recognized then-Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaidó as the country's interim leader over Nicolás Maduro, who has ruled the country since 2013.
The policy, which led Venezuela to officially sever ties with the United States, was consistent with the first Trump administration's policy of maximum pressure and a desire for regime change when it came to the socialist government in Caracas.
Fast forward six years: The early days of Trump's second administration has seen the U.S. president negotiate with Maduro over the release of detained Americans and an apparent willingness from Venezuela to receive hundreds of thousands of its nationals being deported from the U.S.
As a diplomat who served in Venezuela and knew Maduro's predecessor and mentor, Hugo Chavez, I detect a subtle shift in the evolving Trump administration's policy toward Venezuela. It's true that the administration retains a strong dose of the anti-Maduro posture it held last time, particularly in light of Maduro's widely denounced election fraud in 2024 and an undercurrent of antipathy in Washington toward left-wing authoritarianism in Latin America.
But U.S.-Venezuela relations under a second Trump term are subject to other factors and dynamics, including Trump's desire to be known for deal-making and the fulfillment of his campaign promise to deport immigrants back to Latin America. At the same time, Trump needs to balance satisfying anti-Maduro voices in his coalition with not pushing Venezuela further toward China, a country all too willing to exert greater influence in parts of Latin America.
So far, the second Trump's administration seems to be sticking to the line of not officially recognizing Maduro and preferring his departure from the scene. It has kept sanctions on the country intact and continues to recognize Maduro's opponent, Edmundo González, as the legitimate president-elect.
But that hasn't stopped the administration from pursuing negotiations. In late January, Trump's envoy Richard Grenell visited Caracas to secure the release of six Americans accused by Venezuela of plotting to destabilize the country. Trump subsequently announced that Maduro would accept repatriation of deportations of Venezuelans in the U.S. The U.S. administration also revoked the Temporary Protected Status, a categorization prioritized by President Joe Biden, for hundreds of thousands of people who fled Maduro's Venezuela.
On Feb. 10, two Venezuelan planes returned home from the U.S with nearly 200 deported Venezuelan nationals, a signal that negotiations between the two nations were more than just optics. But news that the Trump administration has sent Venezuelan detainees to a U.S. military camp at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba – and is trying to send more – could yet prove a thorn in the side of any diplomatic thaw.
Regardless, the shift in stance on Venezuela has raised eyebrows among some Republicans and Democrats alike. Their concern is that Grenell's visit – and overtures from the White House – gives Maduro's regime a veneer of legitimacy.
But so long as Trump feels Venezuela under Maduro is useful to his aims of deportations, other U.S. issues with the government in Caracas are, I believe, likely to remain of secondary importance.
The complicated dynamic of two men, ideologically opposed but aware of the other's usefulness, is reciprocated by Maduro. The Venezuelan leader congratulated Trump on his election victory in November, and he appears to treat his more powerful adversary with some pragmatism. But Maduro also remains willing to take a strident line rhetorically, even suggesting that Venezuela might 'liberate' Puerto Rico if the U.S. keeps meddling with Venezuela's affairs.
Rhetoric aside, Maduro – as evidenced by his apparent willingness to deal with the new administration on hostages and immigration – is likely to pursue self-interest where possible. And he will be well aware that the survival of his rule may be tied with his country's economic situation.
Venezuela has been hit hard by U.S. sanctions that have been in place since 2017.
The level of poverty in the country is estimated to be around 80% of the population. This bleak economic picture is improving slowly but is still hampered by sluggish oil production despite having vast reserves.
Under Biden, the U.S. granted some exemptions for oil companies to work in Venezuela despite sanctions, helping the struggling export industry to recover some of its lost productivity.
Maduro will want to see where he can work with the Trump team to continue such allowances and avoid a full embargo. But recent noises coming from the administration have been mixed on this front. On Jan. 20, Trump suggested that he may pull the plug on Venezuelan oil exports to the U.S. 'We don't have to buy their oil. We have plenty of oil for ourselves,' he said.
Such a move would be a severe blow to Venezuela's economy, which has benefited from increased exports to the U.S. in recent years. But the move will likely face resistance from oil producers like Chevron, the American company that has a license to operate in Venezuela.
It's plausible Trump will be swayed by the elements of his base or administration who view Venezuela primarily in terms of a socialist authoritarian adversary to be defeated.
In 2024, Maduro pulled off one of Latin America's great election frauds. Computer printouts had shown the opposition campaign of González and Maria Corina Machado won the July election by a landslide. And yet, Maduro declared himself the winner with no evidence.
Many in Trump's circle viewed the fraudulent election as another reason for being hawkish toward the nation – a position that takes in both ideological and electoral considerations.
Trump knows there is a strong base of anti-communist Venezuelans in Florida who want to be tough on the Cuban-aligned government of Maduro. The new U.S. administration's deportation policy has already concerned some among this strongly Trump voting base; any relaxation on Maduro could be seen as a further 'betrayal.'
And Trump has appointed several people who have long been critical of Maduro, including his national security adviser, Mike Waltz, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
Rubio, in particular, is a longtime critic of any accommodation with Venezuela. He has spoken to opposition leaders, called González the legitimate president, blasted any relaxation of sanctions and, during his confirmation hearing, labeled Maduro's government 'a narco-trafficking organization.'
And while U.S. envoy Grenell has been shaking hands with Maduro, Rubio has been seizing the Venezuelan leader's aircraft. On Feb. 6, the U.S. secretary of state personally oversaw its confiscation while visiting the Dominican Republic, where it had been impounded since last year.
During his first administration, Trump failed in his efforts to encourage the replacement of Maduro.
In any case, the Venezuelan government under Maduro, like Chavez before him, has shown itself capable of withstanding U.S. pressure.
Throwing a further wrinkle to any U.S. intentions of influencing the future of Venezuela is the role China has taken on in the country and Maduro's increasing closeness with Beijing. In contrast to leaders in the West, China's president, Xi Jinping, congratulated Maduro following the latter's claim of victory in 2024. China is the leading importer of Venezuelan crude oil and has signed a series of bilateral trade and tourism pacts that have provided Maduro an economic lifeline.
To some U.S. hawks, China's influence with Maduro represents a breach of a long-standing vision of the U.S. as a regional hegemony, as envisioned by the Monroe Doctrine. Yet other voices within the administration – including Trump, who has spoken positively about diplomatic overtures to Beijing, or Elon Musk, who has extensive business interests in China – view the country in far different terms than predecessors.
Ultimately, whatever path Trump chooses on relations with Venezuela is likely to be conditioned on what factions win out in his administration and which political constituencies the president is most keen to please.
This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Paul Webster Hare, Boston University
Read more:
Massive protests erupt again over disputed Venezuelan elections – but they look different this time
US sovereign wealth fund: A feasible idea to invest strategically, or a giant opportunity for waste?
What is Temporary Protected Status? A global migration expert explains why the US offers some foreign nationals temporary protection
Paul Webster Hare does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hill
24 minutes ago
- The Hill
Senate expected to pass crypto bill without addressing Trump's investments
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate is expected to approve legislation Tuesday that would regulate a form of cryptocurrency known as stablecoins, the first of what is expected to be a wave of crypto legislation from Congress that the industry hopes will bolster its legitimacy and reassure consumers. The fast-moving legislation, which will be sent to the House for potential revisions, comes on the heels of a 2024 campaign cycle where the crypto industry ranked among the top political spenders in the country, underscoring its growing influence in Washington and beyond. Eighteen Democratic senators have shown support for the legislation as it has advanced, siding with the Republican majority in the 53-47 Senate. If passed, it would become the second major bipartisan bill to advance through the Senate this year, following the Laken Riley Act on immigration enforcement in January. Still, most Democrats oppose the bill. They have raised concerns that the measure does little to address President Donald Trump's personal financial interests in the crypto space. 'We weren't able to include certainly everything we would have wanted, but it was a good bipartisan effort,' said Sen. Angela Alsobrooks, D-Md., on Monday. She added, 'This is an unregulated area that will now be regulated.' Known as the GENIUS Act, the bill would establish guardrails and consumer protections for stablecoins, a type of cryptocurrency typically pegged to the U.S. dollar. The acronym stands for 'Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins.' It's expected to pass Tuesday, since it only requires a simple majority vote — and it already cleared its biggest procedural hurdle last week in a 68-30 vote. But the bill has faced more resistance than initially expected. There is a provision in the bill that bans members of Congress and their families from profiting off stablecoins. But that prohibition does not extend to the president and his family, even as Trump builds a crypto empire from the White House. Trump hosted a private dinner last month at his golf club with top investors in a Trump-branded meme coin. His family holds a large stake in World Liberty Financial, a crypto project that provides yet another avenue where investors are buying in and enriching the president's relatives. World Liberty has launched its own stablecoin, USD1. The administration is broadly supportive of crypto's growth and its integration into the economy. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent last week said the legislation could help push the U.S. stablecoin market beyond $2 trillion by the end of 2028. Brian Armstrong, CEO of Coinbase — the nation's largest crypto exchange and a major advocate for the bill — has met with Trump and praised his early moves on crypto. This past weekend, Coinbase was among the more prominent brands that sponsored a parade in Washington commemorating the Army's 250th anniversary — an event that coincided with Trump's 79th birthday. But the crypto industry emphasizes that they view the legislative effort as bipartisan, pointing to champions on each side of the aisle. 'The GENIUS Act will be the most significant digital assets legislation ever to pass the U.S. Senate,' Senate Banking Committee Chair Tim Scott, R-S.C., said ahead of a key vote last week. 'It's the product of months of bipartisan work.' The bill did hit one rough patch in early May, when a bloc of Senate Democrats who had previously supported the bill reversed course and voted to block it from advancing. That prompted new negotiations involving Senate Republicans, Democrats and the White House, which ultimately produced the compromise version expected to win passage Tuesday. 'There were many, many changes that were made. And ultimately, it's a much better deal because we were all at the table,' Alsobrooks said. Still, the bill leaves unresolved concerns over presidential conflicts of interest — an issue that remains a source of tension within the Democratic caucus. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., has been among the most outspoken as the ranking member on the Senate Banking Committee, warning that the bill creates a 'super highway' for Trump corruption. She has also warned that the bill would allow major technology companies, such as Amazon and Meta, to launch their own stablecoins. If the stablecoin legislation passes the Senate on Tuesday, it still faces several hurdles before reaching the president's desk. It must clear the narrowly held Republican majority in the House, where lawmakers may try to attach a broader market structure bill — sweeping legislation that could make passage through the Senate more difficult. Trump has said he wants stablecoin legislation on his desk before Congress breaks for its August recess, now just under 50 days away.

25 minutes ago
Federal appeals court set to hold hearing over Trump National Guard deployment in California
The legal battle over the Trump administration's deployment of the National Guard in California heads to a federal appeals court on Tuesday. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals will preside over a remote hearing regarding California's challenge to President Donald Trump 's federalization of the state's National Guard troops amid protests over immigration enforcement in the Los Angeles area. Last week, a federal judge in California issued a temporary restraining order that would have blocked Trump's deployment of the troops and returned control of the California National Guard to Gov. Gavin Newsom, who did not consent to the Guard's activation. However, following an appeal by the Trump administration, a panel of three judges on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an administrative stay of the lower court's order, dealing the Trump administration a temporary reprieve to what would have been a major reversal of its policy on the protests in Los Angeles. The three-judge panel -- made up of two judges nominated by Trump and one nominated by former President Joe Biden -- scheduled the hearing on the matter for Tuesday afternoon. The district judge's order called Trump's actions "illegal." "At this early stage of the proceedings, the Court must determine whether the President followed the congressionally mandated procedure for his actions. He did not," U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer said in his June 12 order granting the temporary restraining order sought by Newsom. "His actions were illegal -- both exceeding the scope of his statutory authority and violating the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. He must therefore return control of the California National Guard to the Governor of the State of California forthwith." The order did not limit Trump's use of the Marines, which had also been deployed to LA. In a press conference after the district court's order, Newsom said he was "gratified" by the ruling, saying he would return the National Guard "to what they were doing before Donald Trump commandeered them." In its appeal to the Ninth Circuit, administration lawyers called the district judge's order "unprecedented" and an "extraordinary intrusion on the President's constitutional authority as Commander in Chief." Some 4,000 National Guardsmen and 700 Marines were ordered to the Los Angeles area following protests over immigration raids. California leaders claim Trump inflamed the protests by sending in the military when it was not necessary.


Washington Post
25 minutes ago
- Washington Post
What to know about bunker-buster bombs and Iran's Fordo nuclear facility
BANGKOK — If the U.S. decides to support Israel more directly in its attack on Iran, one option for Washington would be to provide the 'bunker-buster' bombs believed necessary to significantly damage the Fordo nuclear fuel enrichment plant , built deeply into a mountain. Such a bomb would have to be dropped from an American aircraft, which could have wide-ranging ramifications, including jeopardizing any chance of Iran engaging in Trump's desired talks on its nuclear program. Israeli officials have also suggested that there are other options for it to attack Fordo as it seeks to destroy Iran's nuclear capabilities .