Machado and Rubio Seek to Intensify Aggression Against Venezuela

July 8, 2025

For Venezuela in particular, and for Latin America and the Caribbean in general, one of the political events with the greatest impact so far this year has been, even more than Donald Trump’s presidency, the appointment of Marco Rubio as US Secretary of State.

This appointment marked a turning point not only in the Trump administration but also in the revival of Washington’s interventionist agenda in the region, which has been gaining momentum ever since. With his obsession with Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua, Rubio has intensified the rhetoric that seeks to portray the Venezuelan government as a threat to regional security, something that is not new but is now taking a more aggressive turn.

Recently, efforts to portray him as a real danger have been amplified with issues such as the “Aragua Train,” the reissue of the “Cartel of the Suns,” and ongoing false flag operations at the borders. Such events are part of a broader strategy aimed at generating internal and external tensions that justify intervention, whether diplomatic, economic, or even military.

From baseless accusations to covert operations backed by US agencies, the agenda to destabilize Venezuela follows a historical pattern reminiscent of previous justifications used by Washington in other interventions, such as in Iraq. Thus, Venezuela is once again in the crosshairs, under a discourse that seeks to create the perfect excuse for systematic aggression.

1. The Guyanese enclave and the false flag

The Cuyuní River incident (February 18). In the Venezuelan Essequibo, the Guyanese government reported an alleged attack against its troops on the banks of the Cuyuní River. According to Georgetown, six Guyanese soldiers were wounded by armed “Venezuelan” men. Caracas categorically denied the accusation, calling it a “vile fabrication” and pointing out that it was part of a false flag operation. Venezuelan Foreign Minister Yván Gil denounced the incident as part of a strategy to justify the militarization of the area with the backing of the US Southern Command. Venezuela recalled that Guyana’s violations of the international legal framework are recurrent, especially in the territorial dispute over the Essequibo.

Marco Rubio’s visit to Guyana (March 27). The agenda of aggression was consolidated with Marco Rubio’s visit to that country, where he signed a memorandum of understanding with its president, Irfaan Ali. The agreement focused on security cooperation, but in practice it is perceived as a mechanism to reinforce the US military presence in Guyana under the pretext of combating “organized crime.” Rubio and other US officials fueled the narrative of the presence of the Tren de Aragua, a subterfuge that could result in covert maneuvers similar to the false flag operations the US has used in the past to justify military interventions.

“So I think if we have information that someone has entered your country [Guyana] with bad intentions, we want to be able to share that with your government. We have leads on a member of the Tren de Aragua gang from Venezuela. We want to make sure we collaborate and share news. If we have information that some drug traffickers are establishing themselves here and have decided to turn this into a base of operations, which could lead to violence and war, such as gang warfare, we want to provide that information,” the Secretary of State said at the time.

Another false flag operation (May 15). There was another complaint from Ali’s administration about clashes in areas of the border that had not yet been demarcated. However, the Bolivarian National Armed Forces (FANB) categorically denied these accusations. A statement said the reports showed that the allegations were part of a false flag operation orchestrated to victimize the Guyanese government and fabricate artificial tensions on the border. In this regard, Executive Vice President Delcy Rodríguez warned that these events are part of a broader maneuver aimed at creating a casus belli, that is, an excuse to justify a military escalation in the region.

2. The border with Colombia continues as usual

Denunciation of inaction by Colombia (end of April). President Nicolás Maduro denounced the total inaction of the Colombian authorities in the face of the growing presence of irregular groups, drug trafficking, and violence crossing into Venezuelan territory.

The Venezuelan president emphasized the institutional silence of Gustavo Petro’s government, stating that “the military calls the military over there and they don’t answer the phone,” and that “they call the police over there and they don’t answer the phone,” underscoring the lack of response to the growing crisis on the border.

Security operation and arrests (May 19). Minister Diosdado Cabello announced a major national security operation to confront a destabilization plot orchestrated from Colombia. Thirty-eight individuals were arrested, including 17 foreigners—Colombians, Mexicans, Ukrainians, and an Albanian with Colombian nationality—who were involved in electoral sabotage and explosive attacks. Those arrested had received paramilitary training in Ecuador and were financed by Colombian drug traffickers linked to political figures such as Álvaro Uribe, Iván Duque, and Juan Manuel Santos. This criminal network aimed to create chaos and destabilize the May 25 elections, when the governor and Legislative Council of the state of Guayana Esequiba were elected.

International conspiracy (July 2025). The government dismantled a complex international conspiracy plot directed from Colombia, with the backing of US agencies, which sought to carry out terrorist attacks on Venezuelan territory. Minister Cabello revealed at a press conference that state intelligence agencies had captured several members of a criminal network involved in arms trafficking and the planning of political attacks. These actors were also involved in creating false narratives to justify possible foreign aggression against Venezuela. The operation, whose main objective was to generate chaos in the country prior to the July 27 municipal elections, followed the pattern of hybrid warfare and covert operations historically used by powerful sectors in Washington. Minister Cabello explained that this destabilization network included members of the extremist opposition faction, including María Corina Machado, who were linked to Colombian political figures and foreign intelligence agencies, such as the FBI.

3. Relaunch of the “narco-state”

The recent guilty plea of Hugo “El Pollo” Carvajal in a New York federal court has revived the “narco-state” narrative, a discourse used by the United States to criminalize the Venezuelan government. Carvajal, who pleaded guilty to conspiracy to import cocaine and narco-terrorism, has been presented as part of the so-called Cartel of the Suns. This narrative has historically been used by Washington as a basis for justifying pressure, sanctions, and threats of intervention. However, despite the lack of hard evidence, the discourse is sustained by media reports and judicial accusations based on confessions such as those made by Carvajal.

4. María Corina Machado and irresponsibility

María Corina Machado has reappeared with her destabilizing agenda and, above all, with blatant irresponsibility, taking advantage of the international tension generated by the attacks against Iran to revive her worn-out narrative about the “Venezuelan threat.” In a recent interview, Machado said, without any evidence: “Who is Putin’s great ally in Latin America? Nicolás Maduro. Who is the Iranian regime’s great ally in Latin America? Nicolás Maduro. Venezuela is the only other country in the Western Hemisphere, besides the United States, that has the capacity to build combat drones, obviously of Iranian origin.”

She also pointed out maliciously that “Venezuela is hours away from Florida (United States), not as far away as Tehran,” accusing this of constituting a “real threat.”

During recent investigations into destabilizing actions against the country, it was discovered that a retired scientist, Armando José García Miragaya, former vice president of Control at PDVSA, was in contact with FBI officials providing critical information on crucial Venezuelan infrastructure, such as the Amuay refinery and the Guri dam. This espionage operation, which sought to justify foreign intervention in Venezuela, was directly used to try to back up Machado’s baseless accusations about the existence of “Iranian military bases” in the country.

5. Media agencies add to the intoxication

In March, the New York Post published an article titled “FBI intensifies operations against cartel linked to Maduro’s repressive regime in Venezuela,” in which it revived discredited accusations by reusing the usual hoax linking the Venezuelan government to drug trafficking.

This pattern of unfounded accusations is strategically used at critical moments to justify pressure measures against Venezuela. The New York Post article, signed by Diana Glebova and Jennie Taer, repeats the same myths about the “Cartel of the Suns” and received strong support from figures such as Marco Rubio, who continues to promote a narrative that seeks to create conditions for a larger-scale intervention.

Similarly, on January 15, 2025, the New York Times published an article by Bret Stephens that reflects the revival of the campaign against Venezuela by presenting the Maduro government as a threat to US national security. Stephens, who is close to the Israeli lobby, advocates a “coercive diplomacy” approach and, if necessary, the option of using force, echoing the strategy used in Iraq in 2003.

In his article, Stephens argues that the Venezuelan government must be overthrown on the grounds that Maduro’s continued presence endangers regional stability, citing his alleged links to drug trafficking and Iran’s growing influence.

This narrative, despite its lack of concrete evidence, becomes an excuse that fuels the justification for imposing more severe sanctions and, eventually, direct military intervention.

Stephens’ article, like Rubio’s campaign and the statements of other political actors in Washington, indicates that the pressure on Venezuela is far from over. Instead, the aim is to revive the “maximum pressure” strategy based on unfounded accusations and the amplification of the supposed Venezuelan threat, and thus continue advancing toward an agenda of aggression that, although weakened, remains present and persists in the shadows of US power.

The need to create the threat

The events described above reflect a meticulously planned strategy whose ultimate goal is to create the necessary breeding ground to justify an escalation against Venezuela. Over time, Washington’s tactic seeks to build a case that will serve as the basis for intervention, whether diplomatic, economic, or even military.

In this scenario, the irresponsible accusations of María Corina Machado play a central role. Her rhetoric, fueled by myths and distortions about the Venezuelan government, has constantly reinforced the narrative that Venezuela is a “threat” to regional security.

In her most recent statement, Machado claimed, without evidence, that Venezuela has the capacity to manufacture Iranian-made combat drones, an accusation as baseless as it is dangerous, evoking parallels with the famous “Curveball” case and the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Although this testimony was later found to be false, the manipulation had already been enough to justify the invasion. The narrative was constructed and, with it, the intervention was promoted, which proved to be devastating.

Similarly, Machado, like Marco Rubio, has aligned herself with this disinformation machine, which has contributed to the construction of a narrative that justifies intervention.

The hoax, although disconnected from reality, is strategically exploited to create the “spark event” that can capture the attention of the Trump administration and pressure it to prioritize the agenda focused on Venezuela. These attempts at conflict, when combined, would be used as justifications to pressure Washington to take tougher measures against the country.

The logic behind this operation is clear: if Venezuela is presented as a regional enemy, the US government, especially under Trump, would be more inclined to consider South America and the Caribbean as a key point for its foreign policy and the need to take action against the country.

This type of media and psychological operation aims to normalize the idea that Venezuela is a real threat to international security. Once this perception has taken hold, the door would be open for more severe sanctions, military support, or even direct intervention. The goal is for the White House, backed by a Congress controlled by figures such as Marco Rubio, to push through resolutions or bills that would intensify the aggression against Venezuela.

This dynamic is not new. The creation of a fictitious threat to justify intervention has been a recurring strategy in US foreign policy. Recall the invasion of Iraq in 2003, when the George W. Bush administration used the false testimony of “Curveball” to justify a military invasion based on the threat of weapons of mass destruction. Although these accusations were later revealed to be false, the manipulation of information had already allowed the intervention to take place.

Similarly, what began as a narrative of “defending human rights” in the case of Venezuela has over time become a pretext for imposing illegal sanctions and pushing for more direct intervention. Since 2014, Rubio and the extremist Venezuelan opposition have worked hard to build the necessary case to present the government of Nicolás Maduro as a threat, based on the creation of a narrative that justifies extreme measures, just as happened with Iraq.

The pattern repeats itself: first the threat is created, then the manipulated evidence is presented, and finally that evidence is used to justify forceful aggression. If the Trump administration manages to convince Congress to move forward with new sanctions and more drastic measures, the cycle of intervention will repeat itself, following the same imperial script that we know so well in the Global South.

Source: Mision Verdad, translation Resumen Latinoamericano – English