Related videos:
The United States Senate blocked a resolution on Wednesday that would have limited President Donald Trump's ability to take new military actions in Venezuela without congressional approval, in a close vote that highlighted both party discipline and internal tensions within the Republican bloc.
According to Reuters, the initiative was halted by a Republican motion that was approved by 51 votes in favor and 50 against, with the tie-breaking vote cast by Vice President JD Vance.
Only three Republican senators joined the Democrats to support the measure, which aimed to impose greater legislative control over the use of military force in the South American country.
According to Associated Press, the outcome was the result of an intense political offensive by Trump aimed at the senators of his party.
The president directly reached out to several of them in the days leading up to the vote, particularly pressuring Republicans Josh Hawley (Missouri) and Todd Young (Indiana), who ultimately changed their votes following conversations with Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Both had initially supported the advancement of the resolution last week.
Hawley explained that the president told him that the measure would "tie his hands" in a delicate geopolitical context, and he claimed to have received assurances from Rubio that no U.S. troops would be deployed on Venezuelan soil.
Young, for his part, shared a letter signed by the Secretary of State in which he commits to seeking Congressional authorization "when circumstances allow" before any large-scale military operation in Venezuela.
The debate over the resolution comes after the capture of former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro by U.S. forces in a nighttime operation in early January.
The event, described by the Trump administration as "one of the most successful actions ever taken," sparked an intense debate in Washington about the constitutional limits of executive power in times of conflict.
In statements made on Tuesday in Michigan, Trump defended his actions and criticized the Republican senators who pushed for the resolution.
“Here we have one of the most successful attacks in history, and they find a way to oppose it. It’s incredible, and it’s a shame,” he said, labeling Rand Paul as an “absolute loser” and Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins as “disasters.”
The three legislators maintained their support for the initiative.
Republican leaders in the Senate argued that the resolution was "irrelevant" because the United States "does not have troops in Venezuela nor conducts active military operations there."
The majority leader, John Thune, stated that the Democrats were using the issue to fuel "their anti-Trump hysteria."
From the opposition, Democratic Senator Tim Kaine defended the debate as a way to demand transparency regarding the use of military force.
"If this cause were so just, the administration would not fear debating it before the public and the United States Senate," he stated in the session.
The war powers resolution, based on the 1973 law that allows Congress to limit unauthorized military interventions, had little chance of becoming law even if it passed the Senate vote, as it would have required the signature of Trump himself.
However, the legislative process served as a gauge of the president's influence within his party and the extent of his leeway to act in foreign policy without direct oversight from Congress.
Amid the controversy, Trump has defended that the operation leading to Maduro's capture was framed within legal actions of security and justice, rather than a formal military intervention.
Nevertheless, several senators—including Republicans—have expressed concern over the lack of information regarding the legal basis of the mission and Washington's long-term plans for Venezuela.
A survey by AP-NORC published this week revealed that more than half of Americans believe the president has gone "too far" in the use of military force abroad.
Nevertheless, the Republican backing in the Senate confirms that Trump retains control over his party and the leeway to continue shaping, almost unchecked, the U.S. strategy in Venezuela.
Filed under: