Developing storiesdeveloping story,
America’s top diplomat barely mentions international law as he touts the ‘strategic’ importance of Maduro’s kidnapping.
Published on January 28, 2026
Secretary of State Marco Rubio has begun his testimony before a Senate committee hearing on the United States kidnapping of Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro.
Opening a hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday, Rubio defended the operation, which was condemned as a clear violation of international law.
Recommended stories
3 List of itemsEnd of list
Rubio pointed to what he described as the “strategic” importance of the January 3 operation to kidnap Maduro, describing Venezuela as a “base of operations for every rival, enemy and adversary in the world.”
He listed Venezuela’s alleged ties to Iran, Russia and Cuba.
“(Having Maduro in power) was a huge strategic threat to America, not halfway around the world, not on another continent, but in the hemisphere we all live in, and it was having a dramatic effect on us, but also on Colombia and the Caribbean basin and all kinds of other places,” he told lawmakers.
“It was an intolerable situation, and it needed to be addressed, and now the question is what happens next,” he said.
Rubio said the US had three goals in Venezuela, culminating in “a phase of transition where we have a friendly, stable, prosperous Venezuela – and a democracy”.
In it, Rubio defended U.S. President Donald Trump’s decision to continue working with the government around Maduro, including interim president Delsey Rodríguez, not initially supporting the opposition’s takeover.
Rubio said the first goal is to avoid a civil war in Venezuela and to “establish a direct, honest, respectful, but very direct and honest conversation with the people who control the elements of that nation today.”
He said the second phase is a “recovery period … and this is the phase in which you want to see the normal oil industry”.
Speaking before Rubio, Senator Jeanne Shaheen, the top Democrat in the Senate, focused little on the broader international law implications of the Trump administration’s approach to Venezuela.
Instead, she focused on costs, noting that the military operation and the ongoing naval blockade have been estimated by some outside analysts to cost $1 billion.
“So it’s no surprise that many of my constituents are asking, why is the president spending so much time on Venezuela instead of the cost of living and his kitchen table economic concerns?”