In a stunning reversal, the US Senate voted for a war powers resolution. We are excited about this action to limit President Donald Trump’s power to take one-sided military action against Venezuela. This resolution comes on the heels of a botched attack by US special forces on Caracas. More worrying, it indicates a dangerous escalation in the U.S. role in Venezuela.
An attempted coup d’état played out in the Venezuelan capital. It was tied to the US arrest warrant for President Nicolás Maduro. After the raid, Maduro was shipped to New York City to stand trial on very serious charges of “narco-terrorism.” This turn of events has sparked an intense back-and-forth among legislators. They are facilitating new discussions about the implications for US foreign policy and military engagement in Latin America.
Democratic Senator Tim Kaine introduced the war powers resolution, which mandates that Trump must seek congressional approval before initiating any military action against Venezuela. The resolution passed by a very narrow margin, with 52 senators voting for and 47 voting against. This vote is indicative of increased concern among legislators about the dangers of deepening conflict in the region.
The House of Representatives just last week shot down a similar war powers resolution from Senator Kaine. This contentious decision underscores the polarization of militarized interventions. House Foreign Affairs Committee ranking member Gregory Meeks, the top Democrat on the panel. In 2016, he railed against then-lawmakers Marco Rubio and Pete Hegseth for advocating the use of military force. Meeks stated, “I have not seen the justification. We went from drugs to regime change to oil,” expressing his skepticism about the motivations behind US involvement.
Meeks further signaled his desire to push for introduction of a fourth war powers resolution. He emphasized the need for Congress to clarify its position on military actions, asserting, “I think that we need to get another war powers plan and get a vote on the floor, because this should upset not only Democrats, but Republicans.”
The military’s rationale for executing two survivors after the strike. It should be no surprise that this action has sparked further outrage from Democratic and indeed some Republican lawmakers. Critics warn that these actions risk drawing the US into a years-long conflict, endangering American interests overseas. Kaine added that after recent military actions resulted in injuries to US service members, “Congress needs to tell the American public where it stands.”
Senator John Fetterman, who joined the panel discussions virtually, condemned the raid as a “positive for Venezuela.” He stressed that some legislators have a more positive perception of the military campaign. He noted, “As a Democrat, I don’t understand why we can’t acknowledge a good development for Venezuelans – and how deft our military’s execution of that plan was.”
Next, US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio conducted a members-only briefing for members of both chambers of Congress. Below, they shared their thoughts on the operation and what it achieved. Though particular lawmakers welcomed much of the administration’s work, several raised serious concerns about the risk of deepening conflict.
Mike Johnson, a Republican representative, asserted that “The world is safer because Maduro is apprehended in the hands of the US justice system.” He praised Trump’s decisive actions as sending an important message to “dangerous people, terrorists and tyrants around the world.” His comments reflect a belief among some in Congress that proactive measures are necessary for national security.
Senator Rand Paul put out a warning, suggesting that there could be overreach. He stated that the presumption against unilateral military action must be grounded in principle. He noted, “The reason you argue on principle against even things that appear to be good … isn’t even always for the current president, it’s for the next president.”
The passage of the war powers resolution marks an important moment in US-Venezuela relations. Lawmakers from both parties continue to grapple with the implications of military intervention and its consequences for future foreign policy decisions.