Trump Signals Possible Talks With Maduro Just as U.S. Escalates Military Pressure — and Labels “Cartel de los Soles” a Terror Group
President Donald Trump said the United States “may be having some discussions” with Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro, even as Washington expands a major military buildup in the Caribbean and moves to designate the Venezuela‑linked “Cartel de los Soles” as a Foreign Terrorist Organization — a one‑two punch that opens both a diplomatic off‑ramp and a path to sharper coercion. [1]
- What’s new today (Nov. 17, 2025): Trump floated potential talks; the State Department is preparing a formal FTO designation of the “Cartel de los Soles,” which U.S. officials allege is tied to Maduro. [2]
- Why it matters: An FTO label triggers sweeping “material support” criminal prohibitions and financial restrictions — and could be used to justify a tougher kinetic posture — while talks could de‑escalate a standoff that has alarmed Latin American governments. [3]
- The backdrop: The USS Gerald R. Ford carrier strike group arrived in the region last week as U.S. forces conducted their 20th‑plus lethal strike on suspected drug vessels since September. [4]
What Changed — And Why It’s Significant
Speaking to reporters on Nov. 16, Trump said “we may be having some discussions with Maduro,” a notable shift after weeks of saber‑rattling and a rapid U.S. force buildup positioned as counter‑narcotics. The comment came the same weekend top officials previewed an FTO listing for the Cartel de los Soles, which the U.S. alleges is led by Maduro — a claim he denies. [5]
The Military Picture: From Interdictions to Coercive Presence
The Pentagon has surged assets into U.S. Southern Command’s area of responsibility, including the USS Gerald R. Ford carrier strike group. Venezuela responded by putting roughly 200,000 troops on alert. While U.S. officials frame the mission as counter‑drug, the scale has raised concerns about a slide toward direct action inside Venezuela. [7]
On Nov. 16, the Defense Department said U.S. forces struck another suspected drug boat in the eastern Pacific — at least the 21st strike since early September — underscoring an operational tempo that has killed more than 80 people, according to U.S. briefings reported by major outlets. [8]
Carrier arrival
USS Gerald R. Ford moved into the Caribbean Nov. 11, marking the region’s largest U.S. naval presence in decades. [9]
Strike count
At least 20–21 lethal boat strikes since September; the latest reported Nov. 16 in the eastern Pacific. [10]
Venezuelan posture
Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino López ordered a broad mobilization; Caracas calls the U.S. presence a threat to sovereignty. [11]
Public opinion
Only 29% of Americans support killing suspected traffickers without judicial oversight; 51% oppose. [12]
The FTO Designation: What It Does — And Doesn’t — Do
Secretary of State Marco Rubio has announced the U.S. will designate the “Cartel de los Soles” as a Foreign Terrorist Organization. Under 8 U.S.C. §1189 and 18 U.S.C. §2339B, the label criminalizes “material support” to the group, expands immigration consequences, and aids asset freezes — but it is not, by itself, an authorization for war. [13]
| FTO designation (8 U.S.C. §1189) | Unilateral military strikes |
|---|---|
| Criminalizes “material support” (money, services, training) to the entity (18 U.S.C. §2339B); banks and platforms tighten compliance. [14] | Requires constitutional and statutory authority; without a specific AUMF, the White House invokes Article II and law‑of‑armed‑conflict theories — contested in Congress. [15] |
| Supports sanctions/immigration bars; signals high diplomatic pressure. [16] | Triggers War Powers scrutiny; Senate narrowly rejected a resolution to restrain Trump’s latitude on Venezuela. [17] |
| Does not independently authorize use of force. [18] | Elevates risk of escalation and regional backlash. [19] |
Regional Blowback and Diplomatic Risk
Latin American leaders have balked at Washington’s approach. Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro suspended intelligence sharing over the boat strikes, calling them potential extrajudicial killings, while Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva urged mediation and warned against a U.S. “ground invasion.” [20]
The military buildup — officially justified as anti‑drug — has prompted concerns in regional capitals and among international legal experts about proportionality and jurisdiction, with some warning that “counter‑cartel” strikes could morph into regime‑change coercion. [21]
Congressional Scrutiny and the War Powers Fight
On Nov. 6, the Senate narrowly rejected a War Powers resolution to restrict Trump’s ability to attack Venezuela without authorization, reflecting bipartisan unease yet insufficient votes to constrain the White House. Sponsors Tim Kaine, Adam Schiff, and Rand Paul vowed to keep pressing the issue. [22]
“The executive branch does not have the authority to kill at will anyone, anywhere, at any time, for any reason,” Sen. Rand Paul argued on the Senate floor — a view that fell short in the chamber but signaled ongoing resistance. [23]
Inside the White House Strategy: Carrots and Sticks
Today’s mixed messaging — dangling talks while elevating legal and military pressure — mirrors a broader Trump strategy: pair maximum pressure with a potential diplomatic offramp. The administration has also rooted its posture in prior executive actions tying Venezuela to transnational crime (e.g., tariff pressure tied to Venezuelan oil and terrorism‑related designations), framing the current campaign as national‑security‑driven rather than democracy promotion. [24]
How Maduro Is Responding
Maduro has denied U.S. allegations, mobilized forces, and cast the buildup as a threat to Venezuelan sovereignty. He has intermittently floated dialogue — a stance Trump appears ready to test. [25]
What to Watch Next 🧭
FTO paperwork and timing
State’s formal notice and any congressional review window for the Cartel de los Soles designation. [26]
Operational tempo
Whether maritime strikes persist or broaden to land targets — and whether the Ford carrier group’s presence remains demonstrative or becomes operational. [27]
Hill pushback
Renewed War Powers efforts after the latest vote; oversight demands for legal justifications and strike assessments. [28]
Public opinion
Polling shows limited support for lethal strikes without court oversight; further erosion could constrain policy options. [29]
Legal Context: Authorities and Constraints
FTO designations flow through 8 U.S.C. §1189 and trigger 18 U.S.C. §2339B’s “material support” prohibitions, a regime repeatedly upheld by federal courts. But designations do not substitute for a specific authorization to use military force — the fault line now animating Congress’ War Powers debate. [30]
Separately, the administration has argued the strikes fall under the President’s Article II powers and the laws of armed conflict against “narco‑terrorists,” a rationale that has met resistance from lawmakers and some allies, who question both imminence and targeting standards. [31]
Best‑case scenario
Quiet U.S.–Venezuela talks produce de‑escalation steps (e.g., cartel prosecutions, interdiction cooperation), allowing Washington to reduce the carrier footprint without political cost. [32]
Worst‑case scenario
FTO designation hardens positions; a miscalculation escalates to strikes inside Venezuela, fracturing regional support and triggering a prolonged, unauthorized conflict. [33]
Most likely near term
Calibrated pressure continues — maritime strikes plus high‑visibility deployments — while Washington tests whether talks can extract concessions without granting Maduro legitimacy. [34]
Bottom Line
The administration is hedging: signaling openness to diplomacy while setting legal and kinetic conditions that keep escalation options on the table. Whether Congress, U.S. allies in the hemisphere, and American public opinion tolerate that balance will shape the next moves — and determine if Nov. 17 marks the start of de‑escalation or just another turn of the screw. [35]
Comments
0 commentsJoin the discussion below.