Follow us on social

Shutterstock_1321274198-scaled

House Democrats call on Biden administration to rethink Venezuela policy

Letter signed by twelve members acknowledges shortcomings of sanctions strategy.

Washington Politics

A group of House Democrats are urging the Biden administration to rethink its policy toward Venezuela and adopt measures that would ease the ongoing economic and political crises in the country.

NBC news reported on Thursday that the House members sent a letter to Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen asking to consider conditions under which they would consider lifting certain sectoral or secondary sanctions and re-establishing “limited” diplomatic relations with Nicolás Maduro’s government.

A number of prominent Democrats, including the ranking member of the House Foreign Relations Committee, Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.); the ranking member of the Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, Joaquin Castro (D-Texas); and the ranking member of the House Rules Committee, Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), were among the letter’s twelve signatories. 

“Given the high costs of the crisis for the Venezuelan people and the hemisphere broadly, we believe it is imperative that the Administration respond to this opportunity by empowering the Venezuelan people who are seeking to rebuild their country and their future,” reads the letter.

The Biden administration has offered Venezuela minor sanctions relief — permitting Chevron to resume operations in the country — in an effort to bring President Nicolas Maduro back to the negotiating table with opposition leaders. U.S. officials have signaled a willingness to lift more sanctions if Maduro is willing to engage in good-faith talks. “We are more than ready to reduce and ultimately end our sanctions pressures, but it will take concrete, meaningful steps and ultimately free and fair elections in order to get to that,” Deputy National Security Advisor Jon Finer told reporters in April, after attending a summit organized by the Colombian government aimed at jumpstarting negotiations in Venezuela.

“As Members of Congress who are deeply concerned by the ongoing political, human rights and humanitarian crises in Venezuela, we welcome the Administration’s shift away from the punitive ‘maximum pressure’ policy implemented by former President Trump towards limited reengagement with the government of Nicolas Maduro,” the letter’s signatories say. At the same time, they argue that the administration should “pursue a better strategy to address the rollback of democracy and the severe violations of fundamental rights committed by the Maduro government.”

The latest letter to Biden follows one sent last month by another group of Democratic lawmakers who urged the president to reverse Trump-era sanctions on both Venezuela and Cuba, identifying the economic damage caused by sanctions as one of the primary drivers of the ongoing migration crisis. That letter set up a clash with Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who “vehemently” disagreed that sanctions have been a leading contributor to high levels of emigration from the two Caribbean basin nations. 

“For his part, President Biden has been unwilling to antagonize Menendez because of his important position, and prior to last year’s midterms the White House was reluctant to take any actions that might politically hurt Democratic candidates in Florida,” wrote Daniel Larison in Responsible Statecraft at the time. “Despite considerable evidence that broad sanctions are both destructive and useless, the administration has acted as if they are harmless and effective.” 

This week’s letter reiterates some of the same concerns regarding the humanitarian impact of broad-based sanctions. Sanctions, according to the missive, “have often been found to be ineffective in achieving their objectives.” “[T]o purposefully continue contributing to economic hardship experienced by an entire population,” it added, “is immoral and unworthy of the United States.”

“This is the strongest language about collective punishment sanctions ever written” by a Foreign Affairs Committee ranking member, said Just Foreign Policy on Twitter. 


Julio Lovera / Shutterstock.com
Washington Politics
US Marines
Top image credit: U.S. Marines with Force Reconnaissance Platoon, Maritime Raid Force, 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit, prepare to clear a room during a limited scale raid exercise at Sam Hill Airfield, Queensland, Australia, June 21, 2025. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Alora Finigan)

Cartels are bad but they're not 'terrorists.' This is mission creep.

Military Industrial Complex

There is a dangerous pattern on display by the Trump administration. The president and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth seem to hold the threat and use of military force as their go-to method of solving America’s problems and asserting state power.

The president’s reported authorization for the Pentagon to use U.S. military warfighting capacity to combat drug cartels — a domain that should remain within the realm of law enforcement — represents a significant escalation. This presents a concerning evolution and has serious implications for civil liberties — especially given the administration’s parallel moves with the deployment of troops to the southern border, the use of federal forces to quell protests in California, and the recent deployment of armed National Guard to the streets of our nation’s capital.

keep readingShow less
Howard Lutnick
Top photo credit: Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick on CNBC, 8/26/25 (CNBC screengrab)

Is nationalizing the defense industry such a bad idea?

Military Industrial Complex

The U.S. arms industry is highly consolidated, specialized, and dependent on government contracts. Indeed, the largest U.S. military contractors are already effectively extensions of the state — and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is right to point that out.

His suggestion in a recent media appearance to partially nationalize the likes of Lockheed Martin is hardly novel. The economist John Kenneth Galbraith argued for the nationalization of the largest military contractors in 1969. More recently, various academics and policy analysts have advocated for partial or full nationalization of military firms in publications including The Nation, The American Conservative, The Middle East Research and Information Project (MERIP), and The Seattle Journal for Social Justice.

keep readingShow less
Modi Trump
Top image credit: White House, February 2025

Trump's India problem could become a Global South crisis

Asia-Pacific

As President Trump’s second term kicked off, all signs pointed to a continued upswing in U.S.-India relations. At a White House press conference in February, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi spoke of his vision to “Make India Great Again” and how the United States under Trump would play a central role. “When it’s MAGA plus MIGA, it becomes a mega partnership for prosperity,” Modi said.

During Trump’s first term, the two populist leaders hosted rallies for each other in their respective countries and cultivated close personal ties. Aside from the Trump-Modi bromance, U.S.-Indian relations have been on a positive trajectory for over two decades, driven in part by mutual suspicion of China. But six months into his second term, Trump has taken several actions that have led to a dramatic downturn in U.S.-India relations, with India-China relations suddenly on the rise.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.