Is Rubio's Venezuela Gambit Undermining Trump's Foreign Policy Plan
While talks to end the Ukraine war dominate headlines, a crucial foreign policy shift is unfolding much closer to home—one with major implications for working Americans.
At the heart of this shift is Secretary of State Marco Rubio, whose neoconservative approach to Venezuela threatens to undermine US strategic interests.
By contrast, President Trump’s instincts on Venezuela have been sound so far. He is said to want to move away from the failure of ‘maximum pressure’, and instead, keep Venezuelan oil flowing to lower domestic prices as well as increase cooperation on migrant flights. But POTUS cannot do everything all at once – this has created an opening for Rubio to exert influence.
The result in recent weeks has seen a shift in strategy, one that jeopardizes the ongoing efforts of White House special envoy Richard Grenell to curb migration. It also risks harming the working-class Americans who elected the President so emphatically in 2024.
Things had been moving in the right direction. In January of this year, Grenell’s visit to Caracas signaled a thaw in relations and a lasting shift away from a policy of ‘maximum pressure’ which had yielded no tangible results.
Grenell secured the release of six American detainees, and Venezuela accepted the return of 177 migrants from the US following a deportation flight to Honduras.
However, this diplomatic progress is at risk of being undone by Rubio’s aggressive intervention in March, which halted Grenell’s migration flight negotiations and ran counter to Trump’s ultra-realist foreign policy leanings.
The administration, temporarily won over by the State Department’s agenda, abruptly ordered foreign oil operators, including Chevron, to cease operations in Venezuela within 30 days—a move driven by Rubio’s long-standing commitment to regime change.
Rubio, a long-time supporter of ‘maximum pressure’ seized the opportunity to imprint his misguided vision on US policy as the administration’s attention shifted to Europe.
The fallout from this sudden shift could be severe for US border and energy security.
First, Rubio’s actions have weakened President Trump’s ability to curb illegal migration from Venezuela and undermined Grenell’s efforts to maintain consistent deportation flights, as Caracas withdrew its cooperation in response to the revocation of Chevron’s license.
Second, crimping Venezuela’s oil revenue, as Rubio sees fit, will only push Maduro further into a geopolitically dangerous abyss. The absence of US operators creates a sizeable vacuum in Venezuela’s oil sector.
As a result, Caracas may invite Chinese operators, which already have a presence in the Venezuelan oil market, to replace Chevron, further eroding US influence in the region and strengthening the foothold of its key adversary in its own hemisphere.
Chevron’s operations play a crucial role in maintaining Venezuela’s economy, the stability of which is critical to reducing migratory flows to the US’s Southern border.
The company accounts for 30% of Venezuela’s oil revenue, propping up what remains of the country’s private sector and sustaining the livelihoods of millions of ordinary citizens.
The Federation of Chambers and Associations of Commerce and Production in Venezuela, Fedecámaras, has urged both Trump and Maduro to reopen talks and renew Chevron’s license to operate.
Encouragingly, the White House now appears to once again be pushing back against Rubio’s mistaken approach.
Last week’s announcement by Grenell that Washington and Caracas have agreed to continue deportation flights is an attempt to reassert Trump’s pragmatic instincts over Rubio’s destructive course.
Meanwhile, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, recognizing the potential economic impact at home of Rubio’s adventurism, has looked to slow the State Department’s aggressive push for the removal of licenses.
The Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday that Trump is strongly considering an extension of Chevron’s license, citing fears that China could secure a strategic foothold in the region.
The White House, sensibly, seems to be squashing Rubio’s hopes for a return to ‘maximum pressure’ and pushing back on the State Department’s damaging agenda.
Indeed, Grenell’s engagement-first approach and Bessent’s economic pragmatism reflect a recognition that stability in Venezuela serves both US security and economic interests.
They certainly appreciate America’s reliance on Venezuelan oil, long the lifeblood of thirsty Gulf Coast refineries that depend on its uniquely heavy crude.
Rubio’s fixation on political posturing—fuelled by his ties to Cuban-American hardliners in Florida—has created a dangerous shift in hemispheric policy.
Fundamentally, his belief that throttling Venezuela’s economy will deliver security and stability reveals a troubling absence of strategic foresight.
In reality, his approach risks inflating energy costs, destabilizing South America, and fuelling greater migration pressures on a US border already at breaking point.
Trump’s instincts to engage Venezuela are logical and pragmatic. At this point, stabilization is contingent on ensuring that the South American nation does not spiral into hyperinflation.
However, to succeed, he must curb Rubio’s influence and empower figures like Grenell to deliver a sensible policy that delivers border and energy security.
Anything less risks chaos abroad and great difficulty at home.
By Jose Chalhoub for Oilprice.com
More Top Reads From Oilprice.com