Over the past two months, the United States military has significantly escalated its presence in the Caribbean Sea, deploying a formidable array of warships, fighter jets, bombers, marines, drones, and spy planes. This marks the largest US military buildup in the region in decades, signaling heightened tensions and a potential shift in US policy toward Venezuela. The deployment includes long-range B-52 bomber planes conducting "bomber attack demonstrations" off Venezuela’s coast, the dispatch of the USS Gerald R. Ford—the world’s largest aircraft carrier—and the authorization of the CIA to operate covertly within Venezuela. Together, these developments suggest a deepening US focus on Venezuela, with implications that extend beyond the official rhetoric of combating narcotics trafficking.
The US has justified its military actions by claiming to target drug traffickers and “narco-terrorists” operating from Venezuela. In recent strikes, the US military reported killing dozens of individuals aboard small vessels allegedly involved in narcotics trafficking. However, the US has not provided concrete evidence detailing the identities of those targeted or the nature of the purported narcotics shipments. The strikes have sparked condemnation from regional governments and raised questions among international experts about their legality, with many observers suggesting that the drug war narrative masks a broader political objective: to intimidate and destabilize the Venezuelan government and ultimately remove President Nicolás Maduro from power.
“This is about regime change,” explains Dr. Christopher Sabatini, a senior fellow for Latin America at the Chatham House think tank. He argues that the military buildup is less about direct intervention and more about signaling strength to Venezuela’s military and Maduro’s inner circle, aiming to sow fear and encourage defections. According to Sabatini, the US hopes that this show of force will pressure factions within Venezuela’s power structure to take action against Maduro without the need for a full-scale invasion.
BBC Verify has been tracking the US military’s movements in the Caribbean through publicly available information, satellite imagery, and social media posts. As of late October, they identified at least ten US naval vessels in the region, including guided missile destroyers, amphibious assault ships, and oil tankers supporting refueling operations at sea. The concentration of such a diverse and powerful naval force is unprecedented in recent years and underscores the seriousness with which the US is approaching the situation.
The political context surrounding the US stance on Venezuela is complex. While Secretary of State Marco Rubio and other administration officials have openly criticized Maduro and expressed a desire for his removal, direct calls for military intervention have been more cautious. Rubio, a vocal opponent of Maduro, has described him as a “horrible dictator” and signaled a commitment to policies aimed at ending his rule. Yet, despite these hardline positions, the Trump administration’s public messaging has been somewhat restrained, mindful of previous US campaigns in the region and Trump’s own 2016 campaign promise to avoid “forever wars” and regime change operations abroad.
The US does not officially recognize Maduro as Venezuela’s legitimate president, especially following the widely disputed 2024 election, which many international observers and Venezuelan opposition groups deemed neither free nor fair. The US embassy in Caracas was closed in 2019 during Trump’s first term, reflecting the depth of diplomatic estrangement. In parallel with military actions, the US government has increased its financial incentives for betraying Maduro, raising a bounty to $50 million for information leading to his arrest. However, this incentive has so far failed to produce defections from Maduro’s inner circle.
Experts note that the lack of defections is not surprising given the entrenched corruption and wealth among Venezuela’s elite. Jose Ignacio Hernández, a Venezuelan law professor and senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), points out that $50 million is a trivial sum compared to the profits made through corrupt dealings in the oil-rich country. For instance, former Venezuelan Treasury head Alejandro Andrade amassed over $1 billion in bribes before being convicted. Many analysts agree that any successful regime change would require key support from the Venezuelan military, which would likely demand guarantees of immunity from prosecution to risk turning against Maduro.
Michael Albertus, a political science professor specializing in Latin America at the University of Chicago, emphasizes the deep mistrust authoritarian leaders have for their inner circles. He doubts even a substantially higher bounty—hypothetically $500 million—would be enough to convince Maduro’s closest allies to betray him, given the sophisticated loyalty mechanisms authoritarian regimes employ.
While economic sanctions imposed by