Venezuela

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. REED. Mr. President, for 4 months, my Democratic colleagues and I have come to the floor to warn against President Trump's military operations in South and Central America. We pointed out that his boat- strike campaign was strategically incoherent, legally questionable, and, ultimately, not about narcotrafficking at all. We have argued that the administration's shifting legal justifications, refusal to give Congress straight answers, and, in particular, the failure of the Department of Defense to provide information to Congress, which is required by law--all of these things--together with a massive military buildup, pointed toward something larger than narcotrafficking. Indeed, we warned that these actions were always directed at the government and economy of Venezuela.

That campaign has now culminated in a military raid on Caracas, the capture of Nicolas Maduro and his wife, and President Trump's extraordinary declaration that the United States will ``run'' Venezuela and seize control of its oil reserves.

Let me be very clear about something, at the outset: Nicolas Maduro is a brutal dictator who has destroyed Venezuela's economy, crushed democratic opposition, and fostered widespread corruption. He will not be missed. But this operation was not designed to restore peace in Venezuela or protect America from the ravages of drugs. Indeed, this operation is not about democracy. It is not about the suffering of the Venezuelan people. It is not even about narcotrafficking, despite the administration's killing more than 100 people in its strikes on alleged drug boats. In the President's own words, this campaign is simply about seizing Venezuela's oil and profiting from it.

The people of Venezuela have suffered extraordinary hardship under the Maduro regime. They have voted in multiple elections for new leadership and have been denied their choice through fraud and repression. After everything they have endured, the people of Venezuela deserve to choose what happens next in their country. They do not deserve to have their future dictated by President Trump, Secretary Rubio, or anyone else in Washington.

Yet that is precisely what this administration plans to do. The plan presented by the White House is to simply force the remnants of the Maduro regime to grant the United States exclusive access to Venezuelan oil or face the consequences of a blockade. That is it. That is the plan.

Not in the plan: positive change for the people of Venezuela. There is no framework for elections or democratic transition, no serious assessment of the rival political factions inside Venezuela--factions that have been waiting for precisely this moment to seize power.

I have seen no contingency plan for what happens when China, Russia, Iran, or Cuba--nations with deep economic interests in Venezuela-- decide to block or back proxy groups in a country we have just destabilized, nor have I heard any proposal for the next steps for countering narcotrafficking.

The administration's goals are aspirational at best, and aspirations are not enough when the stakes involve war and the future of millions of people.

One of the first lessons I learned as an Army officer is that hope is not a plan. Over my career, both in uniform and in the Congress, I have seen the United States hope that its military interventions abroad would succeed. I have seen regime changes, nation-building efforts, and elaborate reconstruction schemes launched with confident predictions of success, only to have them collapse when encountered with the reality on the ground.

And the reality is this: When we rely on the U.S. military as our primary tool of foreign engagement, we generally set ourselves up for failure. We have persistently misunderstood and misjudged the cultures, histories, and politics of the nations in which we have intervened because we assume military might is enough. We imagine outcomes that align with our military and economic objectives but are surprised when those outcomes fail. We consistently fail to plan for the ``day after.''

Unless the Trump administration gets serious, Venezuela will be no exception.

This isn't about our military capabilities. We have the most formidable fighting force the world has ever seen, and I am proud and, frankly, not surprised that all elements of our military worked together to successfully execute such a dangerous and difficult mission in Caracas. The skill, professionalism, and courage are beyond question of these men and women.

But military capability is not the same as strategic wisdom. The ability to achieve tactical objectives does not guarantee beneficial long-term outcomes, and executing a successful raid does not constitute a plan for governing a nation of 28 million people.

Congress exists to provide oversight and scrutiny of the executive branch, not to cheer from the sidelines. I commend our servicemen for their performance last weekend, but I am deeply concerned about the Trump administration's lack of serious planning for the next phase. That is why this War Powers Resolution is necessary.

The Constitution vests the power to authorize war in Congress, not the President. President Trump has claimed this was just a law enforcement mission. That is absurd. No matter how he describes it, the President waged war on a foreign nation without authorization, without notification to Congress, and without any explanation to the American people about what this operation will cost or what success will look like. This is a profound constitutional failure, and it must be corrected.

I hope I am wrong about these dangers ahead. I hope this administration is right, and the transition in Venezuela proceeds smoothly. I hope that the Venezuelan people embrace this outcome and see their lives improve quickly. I hope the violent factions in Venezuela choose peace over conflict. I hope the economic recovery for the people of Venezuela justifies this enormous gamble. But as I said before, hope is not enough, and history suggests we should prepare for a far more difficult reality.

The question before us is whether Congress will fulfill its constitutional duty or whether we will abdicate our responsibility and allow this President to commit American military resources, credibility, and, potentially, American lives to an open-ended entanglement without authorization or accountability.

I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source