A debate is brewing in Washington over how to handle U.S. policy toward Venezuela, particularly among Republicans. An America First faction is advocating for a focus on deportations and trade interests, which is causing tension within the party, especially among Florida Republicans.
In the early days of President Donald Trump’s second term, he made significant changes to Venezuela policy. He ended temporary protected status (TPS) for about 600,000 Venezuelans and sent envoy Ric Grenell to Caracas, where he helped secure the release of six American hostages. This marked a shift from the previous administration’s hardline stance, which was largely driven by immigration concerns.
The reasoning behind this new approach is straightforward. With Nicolás Maduro firmly in power and Venezuela strengthening ties with adversaries like China and Turkey, some in the America First camp believe that pushing for regime change is no longer effective. They argue that sanctions have not worked as intended and have allowed adversaries to take advantage of Venezuela’s resources. Instead of sticking to traditional methods, they suggest introducing new goals, such as immigration reform and trade agreements, to better protect U.S. interests.
Critics of the old approach point out that it has led to a situation where there is no democracy, no trade, and no deportations. They argue that achieving some progress is better than achieving nothing at all. In South Florida, this shift is particularly concerning for Republican politicians. Many Venezuelan-Americans, who largely supported Trump, feel let down by the ending of TPS.
Take the city of Doral, for instance, which has the largest Venezuelan population in the U.S. In the 2020 election, Doral swung heavily toward Trump, giving him a 23-point victory over Biden. The local Republican Party is worried that Democrats could exploit Trump’s recent policy changes, especially among voters who are concerned about immigration.
Recently, Florida Republicans, including Senator Rick Scott and several Cuban-American representatives, have voiced their opposition to the current Venezuela policy. They argue that it is better to handle cases individually rather than adopting a broad approach. They emphasize the need to protect Venezuelans fleeing oppression while also ensuring that those who do not qualify for protection are sent back.
Despite the backlash from Florida Republicans, the Trump administration has not signaled a complete reversal of its Venezuela strategy. There are signs that a more nationalistic approach is gaining traction, but the traditional anti-communist sentiment remains strong.
As Republican leaders work to balance differing ideologies and electoral pressures, it remains unclear how U.S. policy toward Venezuela will evolve. The situation is fluid, and the administration’s approach may not fit neatly into established categories. For those following U.S.-Venezuela relations, the coming months will be telling.