Skip to Content Facebook Feature Image

Trump leaves military action against Venezuela on the table but floats possible talks

News

Trump leaves military action against Venezuela on the table but floats possible talks
News

News

Trump leaves military action against Venezuela on the table but floats possible talks

2025-11-18 08:57 Last Updated At:09:00

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump on Monday did not rule out military action against Venezuela despite bringing up a potential diplomatic opening with leader Nicolás Maduro, who has insisted that a U.S. military buildup and strikes on alleged drug boats near his South American country are designed to push him out of office.

Trump reiterated that he “probably would talk to” Maduro, but underscored that he is not taking off the table the possibility of military action on Venezuelan territory. Hours later, Maduro said he is open to dialogue with the Trump administration.

“I don’t rule out that. I don’t rule out anything,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office a day after he first floated the possibility of having “discussions” with Maduro. Trump, however, sidestepped questions about whether Maduro could say anything to him that would lead to the U.S. backing off its military show of force.

“He’s done tremendous damage to our country,” said Trump, tying Maduro to drugs and migrants coming into the U.S. from Venezuela. “He has not been good to the United States, so we’ll see what happens.”

The comments from both leaders deepened the uncertainty about the Trump administration's next steps toward Maduro's government. The U.S. has ratcheted up the pressure in recent days, saying it was expecting to designate as a terrorist organization a cartel it says is led by Maduro and other high-level Venezuelan government officials.

The USS Gerald R. Ford and accompanying warships arrived in the Caribbean this weekend just as the U.S. military announced its latest in a series of strikes against vessels suspected of transporting drugs.

The administration says its actions are a counterdrug operation meant to stop narcotics from flowing to American cities, but some analysts, Venezuelans and the country’s political opposition see them as an escalating pressure tactic against Maduro.

The Trump administration has shown it “can turn policy on a dime,” said Geoff Ramsey, an expert on U.S. policy toward Venezuela who is a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council. He pointed to the diplomatic talks the administration held with Iran “right up until the point” that the U.S. military targeted Iran’s nuclear facilities in June.

But, Ramsey added, the timing of Trump’s remarks — after Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s announcement of the impending terrorist designation of the Cartel de los Soles — underscores that the administration does not want to repeat failed attempts at dialogue.

“They really want to negotiate from a place of strength, and I think the White House is laying out an ultimatum for Maduro,” Ramsey said. “Either he engages in credible talks about a transition, or the U.S. will have no choice but to escalate.”

Maduro has negotiated with the U.S. and Venezuela's political opposition for several years, most notably in the two years before the July 2024 presidential election. Those negotiations resulted in agreements meant to pave the way for a free and democratic election, but Maduro repeatedly tested their limits, ultimately claiming victory despite credible evidence that he lost the contest by a 2-to-1 margin.

Among the concessions the U.S. made to Maduro during negotiations was approval for oil giant Chevron Corp. to resume pumping and exporting Venezuelan oil. The corporation’s activities in the South American country resulted in a financial lifeline for Maduro’s government.

During his weekly television show Monday, Maduro addressed Trump's comments, saying that “free countries and governments should only understand each other through diplomacy.”

“Anyone who wants to engage in dialogue will find in us people of their word, decent people, and people with the experience to lead Venezuela,” he said. Later, in English, he added: “Talk, yes. Peace, yes. War, no. Never, never, war.”

A spokesperson for Venezuelan opposition leader and Nobel Peace Prize winner María Corina Machado told reporters Monday that she would not comment on Trump’s remarks.

Trump didn’t even rule out possible military action against close allies in the region.

“Would I want strikes in Mexico to stop drugs? OK with me, whatever we have to do to stop drugs,” Trump said, adding that he’s “not happy with Mexico.”

Trump said the U.S. government has drug corridors from Mexico “under major surveillance” and said he would also like to target Colombia’s “cocaine factories.”

“Would I knock out those factories? I would be proud to do it personally. I didn’t say I’m doing it — but I would be proud to do it,” he said.

Trump’s goal on Venezuela remains unclear, but above all, Ramsey said, the president “is looking for a win.”

“And he may be flexible on exactly what that looks like,” Ramsey said. “I could envision the U.S. pushing for greater control over Venezuela’s natural resources, including oil, as well as greater cooperation with the president’s migration and security goals.”

In Venezuela's capital, Caracas, people responded with skepticism and hope to the possibility of a new dialogue between the U.S. and Maduro, whose government has fueled rumors of a ground invasion despite the Trump administration giving little clear indication of such a plan.

“If (the dialogue) actually happens, I hope the government will actually follow through this time," shopkeeper Gustavo García, 38, said as he left church. "We have to be serious. They’ve gotten us used to them talking, but they don’t honor the agreements. You don’t mess with Trump.”

Stay-at-home mother Mery Martínez, 41, said, “Talking is always better.”

“Anything that helps prevent a tragedy is good," Martínez said. “Venezuelans don’t deserve this. A war benefits no one.”

Garcia Cano reported from Caracas, Venezuela. Associated Press writer Jorge Rueda in Caracas contributed to this report.

President Donald Trump answers questions from reporters during a meeting with the White House task force on the 2026 FIFA World Cup in the Oval Office of the White House, Monday, Nov. 17, 2025, in Washington, as FIFA President Gianni Infantino, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and FIFA senior adviser Carlos Cordeiro listen. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

President Donald Trump answers questions from reporters during a meeting with the White House task force on the 2026 FIFA World Cup in the Oval Office of the White House, Monday, Nov. 17, 2025, in Washington, as FIFA President Gianni Infantino, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and FIFA senior adviser Carlos Cordeiro listen. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is taking up one of the term's most consequential cases, President Donald Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship declaring that children born to parents who are in the United States illegally or temporarily are not American citizens. Trump plans to be in attendance.

In arguments Wednesday, the justices will hear Trump’s appeal of a lower-court ruling from New Hampshire that struck down the citizenship restrictions, one of several courts that have blocked them. They have not taken effect anywhere in the country.

A definitive ruling is expected by early summer.

Trump will be the first sitting president to attend oral arguments at the nation’s highest court.

The case frames another test of Trump's assertions of executive power that defy long-standing precedent for a court that has largely ruled in the president's favor — but with some notable exceptions that Trump has responded to with starkly personal criticisms of the justices.

The birthright citizenship order, which Trump signed the first day of his second term, is part of his Republican administration’s broad immigration crackdown.

Birthright citizenship is the first Trump immigration-related policy to reach the court for a final ruling. The justices previously struck down global tariffs Trump had imposed under an emergency powers law that had never been used that way.

Trump reacted furiously to the late February tariffs decision, saying he was ashamed of the justices who ruled against him and calling them unpatriotic.

He issued a preemptive broadside against the court on Sunday on his Truth Social platform. “Birthright Citizenship is not about rich people from China, and the rest of the World, who want their children, and hundreds of thousands more, FOR PAY, to ridiculously become citizens of the United States of America. It is about the BABIES OF SLAVES!,” the president wrote. “Dumb Judges and Justices will not a great Country make!”

Trump's order would upend the long-standing view that the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, and federal law since 1940 confer citizenship on everyone born on American soil, with narrow exceptions for the children of foreign diplomats and those born to a foreign occupying force.

The 14th Amendment was intended to ensure that Black people, including former slaves, had citizenship, though the Citizenship Clause is written more broadly. “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside,” it reads.

In a series of decisions, lower courts have struck down the executive order as illegal, or likely so, under the Constitution and federal law. The decisions have invoked the high court's 1898 ruling in Wong Kim Ark, which held that the U.S.-born child of Chinese nationals was a citizen.

The Trump administration argues that the common view of citizenship is wrong, asserting that children of noncitizens are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States and therefore are not entitled to citizenship.

The court should use the case to set straight “long-enduring misconceptions about the Constitution’s meaning,” Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote.

No court has accepted that argument, and lawyers for pregnant women whose children would be affected by the order said the Supreme Court should not be the first to do so.

“We have the president of the United States trying to radically reinterpret the definition of American citizenship,” said Cecillia Wang, the American Civil Liberties Union legal director who is facing off against Sauer at the Supreme Court.

More than one-quarter of a million babies born in the U.S. each year would be affected by the executive order, according to research by the Migration Policy Institute and Pennsylvania State University’s Population Research Institute.

While Trump has largely focused on illegal immigration in his rhetoric and actions, the birthright restrictions also would apply to people who are legally in the United States, including students and applicants for green cards, or permanent resident status.

Follow the AP’s coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court at https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court.

President Donald Trump answers questions from reporters after signing an executive order in the Oval Office of the White House Tuesday, March 31, 2026, in Washington, as Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick listens. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

President Donald Trump answers questions from reporters after signing an executive order in the Oval Office of the White House Tuesday, March 31, 2026, in Washington, as Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick listens. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

The U.S. Supreme Court is seen as the moon rises Tuesday, March 31, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)

The U.S. Supreme Court is seen as the moon rises Tuesday, March 31, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)

Recommended Articles