Trump administration officials have told top lawmakers they want Venezuela to cut all economic ties with China and Russia. So far, most Republicans are supportive of that approach.
Democrats, however, warn the policy could sharply escalate international tensions and provoke retaliation from Beijing and Moscow.
Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said requiring Venezuela to sever economic ties with China and Russia is “insane.”
“We have to have a policy broadly that decreases Russian and Chinese influence in our atmosphere. So I’m not, I’m not scared of confrontation with Russia and China as a matter of principle,” Murphy said. “It’s whether you do that smartly or boneheadedly. And this is a boneheaded endeavor that is going to have the consequence of increased friction with Russia and China for very little to no benefit.”
Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., said China and Russia would surely answer if Venezuela were to fall in line with the U.S.’ demands, with unpredictable consequences.
“I don’t how this is all supposed to work out,” McGovern said. “How does China respond to that? How does Russia respond to that? I can’t stand the Chinese government, I can’t stand the Russian government, but I also do understand the realities of world politics.”
The Trump administration has reportedly told Venezuela’s interim president, Delcy Rodríguez, that the country’s government must meet two demands before Venezuela can pump more oil. First, it has to cut those economic ties with nations adversarial to the United States. And second, Venezuela can only partner with the U.S. on selling oil.
During a classified briefing last Monday on Capitol Hill, administration officials told lawmakers that was the White House’s position, two people familiar with the exchange told MS NOW.
The openness with which President Donald Trump has talked about taking Venezuela’s oil has also offended Democrats.
Rep. Jake Auchincloss, D-Mass., said he didn’t have any concerns about “rejecting adversary influence in the western hemisphere, including from China and Russia.”
“I do have concerns with treating Venezuelan oil like it belongs to Donald Trump,” Auchincloss said. “It doesn’t; it belongs to the Venezuelan people and should be used for their economic development.”
For other Democrats, both ideas — taking Venezuela’s oil, and requiring a sovereign nation to cut ties with certain countries as a condition of letting it profit from its own natural resources — were troubling.
“The idea that he can screw over the Venezuelan people when it comes to oil, and he can basically cut off China and cut off Russia from any kind of relations with Venezuela and there’s gonna be no repercussions?” McGovern said. “I just don’t think a lot of this is terribly thought out.”
The top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Adam Smith of Washington, said such strong-arming “certainly contributes to greater conflict.”
“Certainly, we do stand up to abuses of Russia and China. But if we create a world that is a zero-sum game everywhere — that basically, we win or they win — then you’re ramping up the possibility of a deeper conflict,” Smith said. “So you have to balance that.”
He said the administration’s stance “could make it harder to get a legitimate government in Venezuela.”
“If we can work with the Venezuelan people to help them develop a government that is legitimate, representative of the people and actually has the best interests of the Venezuelan people at heart, then that’s a good way to block Russia and China from having too much influence,” Smith added. “But coming in and saying, ‘We’re going to run your country and take your oil,’ not gonna work.”
Some Democrats, though, are open to forcing Venezuela to cut ties with China and Russia, welcoming a more adversarial stance with those countries. Because Trump has maintained a warmer relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin over the years, some say the hard-line posture is a good thing.
“The Trump administration’s general problem is they don’t put pressure on Russia and China,” said Rep. Seth Moulton, D-Mass., a member of the House Armed Services Committee and the Select Committee on the Strategic Competition between the U.S. and the Chinese Communist Party.
Recommended
“So, if this is the first time that they’re doing so, I don’t have a problem with that,” Moulton said.
Rep. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla., a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, echoed the sentiment. “I totally support the administration getting tougher on Russia and China,” he said.
“The United States being in charge of foreign relations in the world is much better than China and Russia,” Moskowitz added.
But for most Democrats who spoke to MS NOW, the new policy was worthy of some concern, even if their party tried to avoid directly calling out the position. For Republicans, however, this stance was another example of Trump’s genius.
“When you look at the challenges that we deal with around the globe, Russia, China and Iran are at the heart of it, and from my vantage point, obviously, we don’t want them having malign influence in our hemisphere and certainly not with respect to oil and minerals,” said Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. “So the administration is right to apply pressure on this regime to cooperate.”
Rep. Randy Fine, R-Fla., who also sits on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, was even more succinct: “It sounds like a good idea to me.”
“This is our hemisphere, and Venezuela was used to prop up our enemies,” Fine said. “I think President Trump showing and reasserting the Monroe Doctrine is a great idea. Fully support it.”
And when he was asked if he was concerned that this new stance could lead to greater conflict internationally, he said, “Not at all.”
“I think we need to show that America is not going to get run over anymore, like we did for all those years under Joe Biden,” Fine said.
Of course, not every Republican was on board. Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., a frequent critic of Trump’s (and other presidents’) interventionist foreign policies, said “you always have that risk” when asked about potential saber-rattling with China and Russia.
“There are a lot of details that haven’t been resolved yet,” Massie said. “I don’t really think the administration itself knows what it means to run Venezuela or to control the oil there.”
Kevin Frey and Jack Fitzpatrick contributed to this report.
