For three years, the Washington foreign policy establishment has insisted that there is only one acceptable outcome in Ukraine: total victory over Russia achieved through relentless military aid, indefinite financial support and escalation readiness regardless of the risks. But strategy and morality are not always the same thing — and real leadership demands confronting reality as it exists, not as we wish it to be.

I write this not as an academic or pundit, but as someone who worked at the center of this conflict. As U.S. ambassador to the European Union during the first Trump administration, President Donald Trump tasked me with bringing Europe into alignment — truly into alignment — behind Ukraine. 

That meant ending the EU’s habitual double-game: proclaiming solidarity with Kyiv while enriching Moscow through energy purchases and dragging its feet on serious sanctions. I saw firsthand how Europe’s hesitation and transactional approach sent Moscow exactly the wrong message. It told President Vladimir Putin the West was divided, unserious and ultimately unwilling to sacrifice comfort for principle. That perception was part of his calculus.

The uncomfortable truth is that the United States is closer to strategic exhaustion than our rhetoric admits. Europe’s defense industries remain underbuilt. American stockpiles are finite. And while Russia has paid a staggering price, it has not collapsed, surrendered or reversed course. Worse, every escalation increases the probability of something unthinkable: a desperate Kremlin resorting to tactical nuclear weapons. That would not be ‘just another step’ on the escalatory ladder; it would fundamentally shatter global stability.

Against that background, the Trump administration’s instinct to seek a quasi-business resolution is not weakness. It is classic realpolitik — recognition that the job of American leadership is to maximize U.S. security, economic leverage and strategic flexibility while minimizing existential risk.

Business leaders know what Washington too often does not: the perfect deal rarely exists. The question is not whether we can achieve a morally pure resolution; it is whether we can lock in outcomes that are measurably better for American interests — and for Ukraine — than a perpetual, bleeding stalemate.

A negotiated settlement, backed by enforceable conditions and leverage, could do precisely that.

First, a settlement can provide Ukraine with a bespoke security guarantee — credible enough to deter renewed aggression but structured to avoid NATO Article 5 entanglement. This isn’t a vague promise; it is a contract with clear performance terms. The U.S. guarantee would stand as long as Russia adheres to its commitments. But if Russia violates the agreement, the snapback provisions would trigger instantly — not months later, not after diplomatic waffling — immediately unlocking full-scale U.S. and NATO support for Ukraine, including offensive weapons, advanced air defense, training and intelligence integration.

Just as important, the consequences of Russian cheating would be explicit, not theoretical.

If Moscow breaks the deal, the United States would reserve the option to openly back Ukraine in retaking every inch of territory — up to and including restoration to its pre-2014 borders. Moscow would know this going in. Deterrence works best when penalties are unmistakable.

And crucially, this would all be public. No more pretending, hedging or quiet back-channel shipments. The world — and Russia — would know that renewed aggression automatically and lawfully unleashes overwhelming Western support, with the U.S. leading confidently and unapologetically. That clarity is a deterrent in itself.

Equally important, this structure protects U.S. sovereignty in the agreement. If Ukraine violates its obligations, the American guarantee becomes void at our sole discretion. Not a bureaucratic process. Not a committee vote. The United States decides. That means Ukraine has every incentive to maintain discipline and treat the arrangement not as a blank check, but as a powerful partnership grounded in responsibility.

Second, a negotiated deal can generate tangible U.S. economic advantage. Ukraine holds minerals and rare earths essential to American industry, national security and technological supremacy. China knows this. Russia knows this. Only Washington’s old guard pretends resource control is not strategic policy. A structured agreement ensuring privileged U.S. access strengthens manufacturing, energy resilience, and economic security.

Third, a settlement can wedge open the relationship between Moscow and Beijing. Right now, the war has pushed Russia completely into China’s arms. That alignment is bad for the United States and for global balance. A disciplined settlement begins unwinding that dependency. America doesn’t need friendship with Moscow; it needs leverage over it. Realpolitik is about advantage, not affection.

Fourth, a deal can compartmentalize strategic theaters. If Russia insists on regional influence, the U.S. can demand reciprocal space in our hemisphere — particularly in Venezuela, narcotics interdiction, and energy-linked criminal networks — reducing adversarial reach in the Americas.

Critics will scream ‘Munich.’ They always do. But Adolf Hitler was leading a rising ideological empire bent on global conquest. Russia is a demographically and economically declining power seeking regional positioning. Brutal, yes — but not irrational. Mature powers negotiate with rivals when negotiations produce superior outcomes.

Others claim any deal rewards aggression. That assumes deterrence is binary — victory or failure. In reality, deterrence is layered.

A settlement that leaves Russia bloodied, sanctioned, strategically constrained and facing automatic, overwhelming Western military escalation — potentially including U.S. support for Ukraine restoring its 2013 borders — if it cheats is not a reward. It is a warning carved into treaty stone.

Meanwhile, the humanitarian and financial realities matter. Endless war means endless dead Ukrainians, shattered cities and endless U.S. taxpayer exposure with no defined victory condition. That may thrill think tanks that never fight wars, but it is not serious governance.

Most importantly, a business-style settlement introduces accountability — currently absent from Washington’s ‘as long as it takes’ mantra. Under a structured deal, compliance is measurable. Triggers are automatic. Support is not improvised — it is guaranteed. Enforcement is not theoretical — it is built in. And unlike today, America would no longer need to whisper its involvement. It would act openly, decisively and with treaty authority.

The alternative? A forever war with rising nuclear risk, continued strategic drift, and deepening alignment between Russia and China. That is not strategy. It is inertia dressed as courage.

Realpolitik does not abandon values. It protects them intelligently. A disciplined, enforceable settlement — with clear snapback provisions benefiting both the U.S. and Ukraine; explicit authority to openly arm Ukraine and potentially support full territorial restoration if Russia cheats; and a guarantee revocable at America’s sole discretion if Ukraine violates terms — is not capitulation.

It is strategic control.

In geopolitics, as in business, the strongest player is not the one who insists on endless confrontation. It is the one who knows when to fight — and when to close the deal.

Tensions between Israel and Turkey are rising amid competing visions for Gaza’s reconstruction and widening strategic friction in Syria, even as both countries remain embedded in a U.S.-led diplomatic framework following the ceasefire with Hamas.

Israel has made clear it will not allow Turkish armed forces to operate inside Gaza, viewing Ankara as a destabilizing actor despite its public efforts to present itself as a reconstruction partner. Turkish sources told Fox News Digital that Ankara does not seek to deploy troops in Gaza, instead focusing on humanitarian aid, infrastructure projects and political influence. 

Dan Diker, president of the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs, said Israel views Turkey as a strategic threat rather than a neutral actor. 

‘From Israel’s point of view, Turkey is the arsonist behaving like the firefighter in Gaza,’ Diker told Fox News Digital. ‘If Turkey is allowed to enter Gaza with several thousand armed men, you can guarantee that this Muslim Brotherhood country will destabilize Gaza and dismantle the very 20-point plan that President Trump has bet the farm on.’

Diker said President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s ambitions extend beyond Gaza, pointing to Turkey’s military presence in northwestern Syria and what he described as Ankara’s long-standing role enabling radical Islamist groups inside the country.

In Trump’s remarks at Mar-a-Lago on Monday at his press conference with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, he repeatedly praised Erdogan and downplayed concerns about a possible Israel-Turkey confrontation.

‘I know President Erdogan very well… he’s a very good friend of mine,’ Trump said. ‘Bibi respects him… They’re not going to have a problem. Nothing’s going to happen.’ Netanyahu smiled and didn’t comment.

At the same time, Trump aligned himself publicly with Netanyahu on Gaza’s future, issuing his strongest statement yet that Hamas must disarm.

‘They made an agreement that they were going to disarm,’ Trump said. ‘If they’re not going to disarm, those same countries will go and wipe out Hamas.’

According to Diker, the president is deliberately managing tensions with Ankara by keeping Erdogan inside the diplomatic framework rather than confronting him publicly.

‘President Trump is very, very good at keeping adversaries close, together with allies,’ Diker said. ‘That’s why he keeps saying that he likes Erdogan. He wants to keep Erdogan in the party. He wants to keep him close.’

Diker said Trump understands his own leverage in the region and believes he can coalesce Arab and Muslim states when it serves U.S. and Israeli interests, citing coordination during the first phase of the hostage deal.

Diker said Netanyahu is now walking a narrow line, trying not to undermine the framework Trump has built while ensuring Israel’s security red lines are maintained.

‘Israel will not allow Turkish Armed Forces in Gaza. It’s not going to happen,’ Diker said, adding that Israel may still be forced into limited compromises to preserve Trump’s broader support, particularly on Iran.

Beyond Gaza, Israel sees Turkey’s role in Syria as a growing point of friction. Ankara maintains influence across large swaths of northern Syria, while Israel has continued air operations aimed at Iranian targets.

Sinan Ciddi, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, warned in an analysis that Turkey views Israel-aligned regional cooperation as a direct challenge to its ambitions.

Ciddi cited a trilateral summit between Israel, Greece and Cyprus in Jerusalem as a flashpoint, arguing it signaled resistance to Turkey’s ‘Blue Homeland’ doctrine and broader maritime claims in the Eastern Mediterranean.

Following the summit, pro-Erdogan media outlets described Israel as a major threat, while Turkey increased military activity that alarmed U.S. allies, including airspace violations near Greece and reported efforts to expand radar coverage in Syria that could hinder Israeli operations against Iran.

Diker said Israel’s recognition of Somaliland adds another layer to the rivalry, particularly in the Red Sea region. ‘The Turks are working in Somalia. They are also working to control and influence what happens in the Red Sea region,’ Diker said. ‘Which is why Somaliland’s development is very, very important.’

He argued that the move gives Israel a strategic foothold along a vital maritime corridor.

‘Israel then has a strategic base, a forward base in Somaliland on the Red Sea,’ Diker said. ‘Very, very important, because it checkmates Turkey.’

Diker said the move was viewed in Ankara as a direct challenge to Turkish ambitions in the Horn of Africa, adding that the Trump administration had ‘expressed its understanding’ of Israel’s decision.

Despite Erdogan’s harsh rhetoric toward Israel and vocal support for the Palestinian cause, Turkish diplomatic sources say Ankara is acting pragmatically. While Turkey sees financial and political opportunity in Gaza’s reconstruction, those sources say Erdogan is aware there is little domestic appetite for sending Turkish troops into the enclave.

That gap between rhetoric and policy, analysts say, is likely to persist. As Diker put it, Trump is trying to keep the diplomatic structure intact while Israel works to contain what it sees as Turkey’s expanding regional footprint. ‘Trump does not want to topple the apple cart,’ Diker said. ‘He wants to try to keep everyone together so that they can move to stage two of the 20-point plan in Gaza.’

President Donald Trump on Sunday issued warnings about Colombian President Gustavo Petro’s political future and renewed threats to annex Greenland.

Trump, speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One, was initially responding to questions about a U.S. military operation in Caracas that resulted in the capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, as well as the future of Venezuela, when he shifted his focus to another South American country.

‘Columbia’s very sick too, run by a sick man who likes making cocaine and selling it to the United States. And he’s not going to be doing it very long. Let me tell you,’ Trump said.

When pressed by a reporter to clarify his remarks, Trump claimed that Petro has ‘cocaine mills and cocaine factories.’

‘So there will be an operation by the U.S. in Colombia?’ the reporter asked.

‘It sounds good to me,’ Trump responded.

His attention then turned to Greenland, where he once again expressed an interest in acquiring the Danish territory.

‘We need Greenland from the standpoint of national security, and Denmark is not going to be able to do it,’ Trump said.

‘We need Greenland from a national security situation. It’s so strategic,’ he added.

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen sharply rebuked Trump’s comments, urging him to cease what she described as baseless threats against a close ally.

‘The Kingdom of Denmark – and thus Greenland – is part of NATO and is thus covered by the alliance’s security guarantee. We already have a defense agreement between the Kingdom and the USA today, which gives the USA wide access to Greenland. And we have invested significantly on the part of the Kingdom in the security of the Arctic,’ said Frederiksen in a press release.

‘I would therefore strongly urge that the U.S. stop the threats against a historically close ally and against another country and people who have said very clearly that they are not for sale,’ Frederiksen added.

Finnish President Alexander Stubb, Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, and Denmark’s Ambassador to the United States Jesper Møller Sørensen all voiced strong support for Denmark’s sovereignty over Greenland after Trump’s comment, stressing that Greenland’s future should be determined by Greenland and Denmark alone.

Greenlandic Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen condemned Trump’s remarks as deeply ‘disrespectful’ in a statement posted on Facebook.

‘Our country is not an object of superpower rhetoric. We are a people. A land. And democracy. This has to be respected. Especially by close and loyal friends,’ Nielsen wrote in part.

‘Threats, pressure and talk of annexation do not belong anywhere between friends,’ he added. ‘That’s not how you talk to a people who have repeatedly shown responsibility, stability and loyalty. This is enough.’

President Donald Trump said the United States is ‘going to run the country’ in Venezuela until what he described as a safe, proper and judicious transition can take place.

Trump framed the role as temporary but necessary, saying the U.S. does not want to allow ‘somebody else get in’ before conditions are stable. He said the goal is peace, liberty and justice for Venezuelans, including those who have fled to the United States and hope to return home.

‘We’re going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition,’ Trump said. 

He also warned the U.S. is prepared to escalate further if needed, saying, ‘We are ready to stage a second and much larger attack,’ and that American forces remain in position. ‘We’re there now, and we’re going to stay until such time as the proper transition can take place,’ Trump said.

Trump spoke during a news conference Saturday hours after U.S. special forces bombed Caracas and captured dictator Nicolas Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores, taking them to New York to face drug trafficking charges. 

Trump said the U.S. plans to directly manage Venezuela alongside partners while rebuilding the country’s oil sector. ‘We’re going to be running it with a group, and we’re going to make sure it’s run properly,’ Trump said. ‘We’re going to rebuild the oil infrastructure, which will cost billions of dollars. It’ll be paid for by the oil companies directly… and we’re going to get the oil flowing the way it should be.’ He said the U.S. would ensure Venezuelans are ‘taken care of,’ including those ‘forced out of Venezuela by this thug.’

Pressed on whether U.S. forces would remain inside the country, Trump did not rule out a sustained troop presence. ‘They always say boots on the ground — so we’re not afraid of boots on the ground if we have to,’ he said, confirming U.S. troops were already involved ‘at a very high level’ during the operation. 

Trump repeated that the U.S. intends to stay and retain control, saying, ‘We’re there now. We’re ready to go again if we have to. We’re going to run the country… very judiciously, very fairly.’ He added that the U.S. was prepared to launch another attack if necessary and accused Venezuela’s former leadership of stealing American-built oil infrastructure, saying, ‘We’re late, but we did something about it.’

Asked whether the U.S. would back opposition leader María Corina Machado or work with Venezuela’s newly sworn-in vice president, Trump signaled flexibility. He noted the vice president had been ‘picked by Maduro,’ but said U.S. officials were already engaging with her. ‘She’s essentially willing to do what we think is necessary to make Venezuela great,’ Trump said, adding that the issue was being handled directly by his team.

Trump continued, ‘She was quite gracious, but she really doesn’t have a choice. We’re going to have this done right. We’re not going to just do this when they leave like everybody else, leave and say, you know, let it go to hell. If we just left, it has zero chance of ever coming back. We’ll run it properly. We’ll run it professionally. We’ll have the greatest oil companies in the world go in and invest billions and billions of dollars and take out money. Use that money in Venezuela. And the biggest beneficiary are going to be the people of Venezuela.’

Trump was asked by another reporter, ‘Why is running a country in South America ‘America first’?’

Trump replied: ‘We want to surround ourselves with good neighbors. We want to surround ourselves with stability. We want to surround ourselves with energy. We have tremendous energy in that country. It’s very important that we protect it.’

U.S. efforts to run or oversee political transitions in foreign countries have frequently encountered setbacks in recent years, highlighting the uncertainty surrounding Trump’s approach to Venezuela.

The last time the U.S. intervened militarily to remove a leader in Latin America was Panama in 1989, when American forces ousted dictator Manuel Noriega. While the operation succeeded quickly, it was followed by long-term challenges in stabilizing governance.

While the invasion quickly removed Manuel Noriega, it resulted in significant civilian harm. Estimates of civilian deaths vary widely, and entire neighborhoods — most notably El Chorrillo in Panama City — were heavily damaged, leaving thousands homeless. This complicated post-invasion stabilization and fueled lingering resentment among parts of the population.

But after years of soaring hyperinflation that wiped out savings, hollowed out wages and fueled mass migration, some U.S. officials — and many Venezuelans — believe virtually anyone who comes to power would be better than Nicolás Maduro. Venezuelans inside the country and those who fled to the United States were seen celebrating in the streets during moments of heightened U.S. pressure, according to videos that circulated widely on social media.

Venezuelan opposition leaders Edmundo González Urrutia and his running mate Machado have positioned themselves as the alternative to President Nicolás Maduro, insisting they won last year’s presidential election despite the government’s declaration of Maduro as the victor.

Machado, who was barred from holding office by the Maduro-appointed high court, threw her support behind González as a unity candidate, while the opposition and several international observers rejected the official results as fraudulent.

González has since left Venezuela amid pressure from the Maduro government, while Machado’s present whereabouts is unknown, urging continued domestic and international pressure to force a political transition.

After the capture, Machado called on Venezuela’s armed forces to recognize opposition candidate Edmundo González Urrutia as the country’s ‘legitimate president’ and commander-in-chief, while declaring the opposition is prepared to ‘assert our mandate and take power.’ In a defiant statement, she said ‘the hour of freedom has arrived,’ argued President Nicolás Maduro now faces international justice, and urged Venezuelans at home and abroad to mobilize as what she described as the final phase of a democratic transition.

Asked about the U.S.’s track record of ousting dictators, Trump replied: ‘That’s when we had different presidents … That’s not with me. We’ve had a perfect track record of winning. We win a lot and we win. If you look at Soleimani, you look at al-Baghdadi, you look at the Midnight Hammer, Midnight Hammer was incredible … So, with me, you’ve had a lot of a lot of victory. You’ve had only victories, you’ve had no losses yet.’

Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado issued an open call for a transfer of power Saturday, urging the military to abandon Nicolás Maduro’s government and recognize opposition-backed candidate Edmundo González as president after the U.S. said Maduro had been captured.

Machado’s statement came hours after President Donald Trump announced that U.S. forces had captured Maduro following what he described as ‘large-scale’ military strikes targeting the Venezuelan government. Trump said Maduro and his wife were flown out of the country, a move that would mark the most direct U.S. military action against a Latin American head of state in decades.

‘The hour of freedom has arrived,’ wrote in a post on X. ‘This is the hour of the citizens. Those of us who risked everything for democracy on July 28th. Those of us who elected Edmundo González Urrutia as the legitimate President of Venezuela, who must immediately assume his constitutional mandate and be recognized as Commander-in-Chief of the National Armed Forces by all the officers and soldiers who comprise it.’

It remained unclear Saturday whether senior commanders have shifted allegiance or whether the opposition has secured control of state institutions.

Machado also called on Venezuelans inside the country to remain ‘vigilant, active and organized,’ signaling that further instructions would be communicated through official opposition channels. To Venezuelans abroad, she urged immediate mobilization to pressure foreign governments to recognize a new leadership in Caracas.

The U.S. conducted strikes on Caracas early Saturday morning and took Maduro and his wife into custody and flew them to New York to face drug trafficking charges.

Machado and González have repeatedly argued that the July 28 presidential election was stolen, pointing to an opposition-run parallel vote count that they say shows González won by a wide margin.

Venezuela’s electoral authorities, which are controlled by Maduro allies, declared him the winner with just under 52% of the vote, compared with roughly 43% for González. The government has rejected allegations of fraud.

The opposition, however, says it collected and published tally sheets from polling stations nationwide showing González received about two-thirds of the vote, compared with roughly 30% for Maduro — a claim cited by several foreign governments that declined to recognize the official results.

Maduro’s government has refused to release detailed precinct-level data to independently verify the outcome, further fueling accusations that the election did not reflect the will of voters.

While González is the opposition-backed presidential candidate, Machado has remained the dominant figure in Venezuela’s opposition movement. Machado won the opposition’s primary by a landslide before being barred from running by Maduro’s government, forcing the coalition to rally behind González as a substitute candidate.

Throughout the campaign, González publicly acknowledged Machado as the movement’s leader, with Machado continuing to direct strategy, messaging and voter mobilization efforts. Machado has remained the public face of the opposition, while González has largely played a formal, constitutional role tied to the presidency.

President Donald Trump’s House GOP critics are ripping the administration’s operation in Venezuela that resulted in the capture of the country’s president, Nicolás Maduro.

Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., was the first to criticize the Trump administration’s operation in Venezuela, again breaking from the majority of his party and butting heads with the commander-in-chief.

Massie, a longtime critic of U.S. foreign intervention, appeared to question the legality of the federal government’s Venezuela strikes.

‘If this action were constitutionally sound, the Attorney General wouldn’t be tweeting that they’ve arrested the President of a sovereign country and his wife for possessing guns in violation of a 1934 U.S. firearm law,’ Massie posted to X on Saturday morning.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) unsealed a four-count indictment against Maduro after Trump confirmed the U.S. took custody of the Venezuelan leader and his wife following strikes in the capital of Caracas.

Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement those charges were ‘Narco-Terrorism Conspiracy, Cocaine Importation Conspiracy, Possession of Machineguns and Destructive Devices, and Conspiracy to Possess Machineguns and Destructive Devices against the United States.’

It’s not immediately clear what Maduro’s wife, Celia Flores, has been charged with.

In a follow-up posted on the charges, Massie said, ’25-page indictment but no mention of fentanyl or stolen oil. Search it for yourself.’

Trump said on Fox News that Maduro and Flores were being flown to the U.S.S. Iwo Jima, which will bring them to the U.S. where they will face criminal proceedings led by the Southern District of New York.

Massie’s criticism was followed by scathing comments by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., another Trump critic who is retiring from Congress early next week before finishing her term.

‘If U.S. military action and regime change in Venezuela was really about saving American lives from deadly drugs, then why hasn’t the Trump admin taken action against Mexican cartels? And if prosecuting narco terrorists is a high priority, then why did President Trump pardon the former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández, who was convicted and sentenced for 45 years for trafficking hundreds of tons of cocaine into America?’ part of Greene’s statement read.

‘The next obvious observation is that by removing Maduro this is a clear move for control over Venezuelan oil supplies that will ensure stability for the next obvious regime change war in Iran. And of course, why is it ok for America to militarily invade, bomb, and arrest a foreign leader, but Russia is evil for invading Ukraine and China is bad for aggression against Taiwan? Is it only ok if we do it? (I’m not endorsing Russia or China).’

Meanwhile, Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., praised the operation itself but expressed concerns about what precedent is being set.

‘My main concern now is that Russia will use this to justify their illegal and barbaric military actions against Ukraine, or China to justify an invasion of Taiwan,’ Bacon said in a statement. ‘Freedom and rule of law were defended last night, but dictators will try to exploit this to rationalize their selfish objectives.’

Bacon is also retiring from Congress, but unlike Greene, he is serving out his full term.

The vast majority of Republican lawmakers unequivocally backed the operation, as expected. 

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., both said they expected congressional briefings from the Trump administration in the coming days when lawmakers return from a two-week recess. 

Vice President JD Vance was not physically present at President Donald Trump’s news conference announcing the capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro because of heightened security and secrecy concerns, according to a spokesperson, despite being closely involved in the planning and execution of the operation.

Trump briefed the press on the mission hours after Maduro was taken into U.S. custody, flanked by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, War Secretary Pete Hegseth and chairman of the joint chiefs, Gen. Dan Caine. 

Vance publicly praised the operation on X but did not attend the briefing. Vance did meet with Trump at Mar-a-Lago on Friday to discuss the strikes, but was not at Trump’s golf club Friday night where senior Trump officials monitored the mission because the national security team ‘was concerned a late-night motorcade movement by the Vice President while the operation was getting underway may tip off the Venezuelans.’ 

‘The Vice President joined by secure video conference throughout the night to monitor the operation. He returned to Cincinnati after the operation concluded.’

Due to ‘increased security concerns,’ Trump and Vance are limiting the ‘frequency and duration’ of time they spend together outside of the White House, the Vance spokesperson told Fox News Digital. 

‘Maduro is the newest person to find out that President Trump means what he says,’ Vance wrote on X after the operation was made public. 

‘And PSA for everyone saying this was ‘illegal’: Maduro has multiple indictments in the United States for narco-terrorism. You don’t get to avoid justice for drug trafficking in the United States because you live in a palace in Caracas,’ he wrote in a separate post. 

Trump, during his news conference, revealed that the U.S. will ‘run’ Venezuela until a ‘safe, orderly’ transition of power can take place. 

Pressed on whether U.S. forces would remain inside the country, Trump did not rule out a sustained troop presence. ‘They always say boots on the ground – so we’re not afraid of boots on the ground if we have to,’ he said, confirming U.S. troops were already involved ‘at a very high level’ during the operation. 

Trump noted Venezuela’s vice president had been ‘picked by Maduro,’ but said U.S. officials were already engaging with her. ‘She’s essentially willing to do what we think is necessary to make Venezuela great,’ Trump said, adding that the issue was being handled directly by his team.

Venezuelan Vice President Delcy Rodriguez has been sworn in as Maduro’s successor, and Trump did not say whether the U.S. will move to install opposition leaders Maria Corina Machado and Edmundo Urutia-Gonzalez. 

Vance, in the past, has voiced skepticism of U.S. interventions. 

In a Signal chat leaked after the Houthi strikes last March, Vance told a group of Trump Cabinet officials, ‘I think we are making a mistake.’

‘[Three] percent of U.S. trade runs through the Suez Canal. Forty percent of European trade does. There is a real risk that the public doesn’t understand this or why it’s necessary,’ Vance said. 

‘I am not sure the president is aware how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now.’

Cuban leaders should be concerned following the U.S. military operation in Venezuela and the arrest of Nicolás Maduro, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Saturday, as President Donald Trump signaled that his administration could shift its focus to the Caribbean island.

Cuba has long maintained a presence in Venezuela, with intelligence agents and security personnel embedded amid close relations between Havana and Caracas.

Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants, said Venezuela’s spy agency was ‘basically full of Cubans,’ as was Maduro’s security detail.

‘One of the biggest problems Venezuelans have is they have to declare independence from Cuba,’ he said during a news conference in which officials revealed details of the military operation. ‘They tried to basically colonize it from a security standpoint.’

He added that the communist island was ‘a disaster. It’s run by incompetent, senile men — and in some cases, not senile, but incompetent nonetheless.’

The secretary has repeatedly denounced Cuba and its leadership as a dictatorship and a failed state.

‘If I lived in Havana, and I was in the government, I’d be concerned — at least a little bit,’ Rubio said.

Trump said Cuba was something his administration would ‘end up talking about because Cuba is a failing nation right now — a very badly failing nation.’

‘And we want to help the people,’ he added. ‘It’s very similar in the sense that we want to help the people in Cuba, but we also want to help the people who were forced out of Cuba and are living in this country.’

Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, were taken by U.S. forces and brought aboard the USS Iwo Jima. They were expected to be transported to the U.S. to face federal charges.

The couple, along with other Venezuelan officials, face ‘drug trafficking and narco-terrorism conspiracies,’ according to an unsealed indictment posted on social media Saturday by U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi.

They are accused of partnering with drug cartels to traffic drugs into the U.S.

Maduro and his wife ‘will soon face the full wrath of American justice on American soil in American courts,’ Bondi wrote.

They are charged with narco-terrorism conspiracy, cocaine importation conspiracy, possession of machine guns and destructive devices, and conspiracy to possess machine guns and destructive devices against the U.S.

Former Vice President Kamala Harris on Saturday evening condemned the Trump administration’s capture of Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro and his wife, calling the operation both ‘unlawful’ and ‘unwise.’

In a lengthy post on X, Harris acknowledged that Maduro is a ‘brutal’ and ‘illegitimate’ dictator but said that President Donald Trump’s actions in Venezuela ‘do not make America safer, stronger, or more affordable.’

‘Donald Trump’s actions in Venezuela do not make America safer, stronger, or more affordable,’ Harris wrote. ‘That Maduro is a brutal, illegitimate dictator does not change the fact that this action was both unlawful and unwise. We’ve seen this movie before.

‘Wars for regime change or oil that are sold as strength but turn into chaos, and American families pay the price.’

Harris made the remarks hours after the Trump administration confirmed that Maduro and his wife were captured and transported out of Venezuela as part of ‘Operation Absolute Resolve.’

The former vice president also accused the administration of being motivated by oil interests rather than efforts to combat drug trafficking or promote democracy.

‘The American people do not want this, and they are tired of being lied to. This is not about drugs or democracy. It is about oil and Donald Trump’s desire to play the regional strongman,’ Harris said. ‘If he cared about either, he wouldn’t pardon a convicted drug trafficker or sideline Venezuela’s legitimate opposition while pursuing deals with Maduro’s cronies.’

Harris, who has been rumored as a potential Democratic contender in the 2028 presidential race, additionally accused the president of endangering U.S. troops and destabilizing the region.

‘The President is putting troops at risk, spending billions, destabilizing a region, and offering no legal authority, no exit plan, and no benefit at home,’ she said. ‘America needs leadership whose priorities are lowering costs for working families, enforcing the rule of law, strengthening alliances, and — most importantly — putting the American people first.’

Maduro and his wife arrived at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn late Saturday after being transported by helicopter from the DEA in Manhattan after being processed.

Earlier in the day, Trump said that the U.S. government will ‘run’ Venezuela ‘until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition.’

Harris’ office did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

Fox News Digital’s Jasmine Baehr contributed to this report.

With Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro extracted from Caracas on Jan. 3, Venezuelans and the world are anxious to learn about the future that awaits.

In a press conference following the Maduro operation on Saturday, President Donald Trump announced that the U.S. is ‘going to run the country’ until a transition can be safely made.

Isaias Medina, an international lawyer and former senior Venezuelan diplomat, said a peaceful transition is vital for the 9 million to 10 million Venezuelans who are forcibly displaced and living in exile. Medina, who resigned his diplomatic post in protest against Maduro’s rule in 2017, told Fox News Digital that exiled Venezuelans ‘have been preparing ourselves to go back to rebuild our nation.’

With support from international organizations like the Organization of American States, Medina said the most important next step for Venezuela is to establish a transitional government that can restore the rule of law and rebuild institutions that have been decimated under the Maduro regime. Setting in place free and fair elections is particularly important, Medina said, noting that it’s ‘a legal obligation owed to [Venezuela’s] people, because on their occupied territory, it was never equitable or really free.’

Under Maduro, Medina said that ‘there was no separation of powers, there was no rule of law, there was not even sovereignty.’ Instead, Medina said Venezuela had an occupied territory extensively influenced by terrorist and trafficking organizations Hamas, Hezbollah, the Ejército de Liberación Nacional (ELN) and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). He said these groups were exploiting Venezuelan resources.

David Daoud, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told Fox News Digital that so long as Venezuela poses no threat to U.S. national security, the ‘ideal situation’ for Venezuela ‘would be American guidance for determined local action.’ 

‘The best we can shepherd Venezuela to be is a productive member of the family of nations, and that’s something that we can help with a softer touch, without boots on the ground,’ Daoud said. ‘I don’t think we need to be in the business of trying to create Jeffersonian democracies anywhere.’

Following Maduro’s ouster, Daoud said the level of chaos allowed to exist inside Venezuela will determine whether terror groups like Hezbollah and Hamas will be able to continue operating there. ‘It would really depend — does the day after in Venezuela create a stable state that is able to properly exercise control over all its territory, is interested in implementing the rule of law, is not corrupt. That would make things very, very complicated, if not impossible, for Hezbollah to operate, at least in the way it has been operating for a decade-plus, ever since the linkage between it and the original Chávez regime came about.’

Going forward, Medina suggested that the country will also have to manage guerrilla forces like the colectivos, violent groups of Venezuelans who were armed and trained with old U.S. and Russian military weapons. Medina said having these guerrillas ‘return the weapons for freedom’ could help to ‘unite the nation under one banner of development and evolution… so that we can have a country that really meets the expectations, not only of the riches that it has, but of the people and the development of their education and training and jobs, because it has been completely destroyed by design.’

Though the road ahead is uncertain, Medina is filled with hope. ‘What we have ahead of us is a great journey to be able to build upon the ruins of what this regime left us. But I think we’re going to become stronger, and this is the moment. The time has come,’ Medina said.