Venezuela: The Quiet Search for a Way Out?
Angelo Giuliano
From the ground in Caracas, the view is one of controlled information. The local media offers a single clear voice, that of President Maduro, while other officials remain silent. This structure suggests he holds the direct line to Washington. Beyond that, certainty is hard to find.
A story is spreading on international news, claiming Maduro is negotiating his surrender and exile. Here, that narrative is widely seen as a psychological operation, a classic pre conflict tactic meant to seed confusion and a sense of inevitable defeat.
Yet, the serious posture of the Venezuelan government indicates that high level talks are probably happening. They are almost certainly not about surrender, but may be focused on preventing a catastrophic escalation.
If that is the case, what could be discussed? Based on the United States government’s aggressive stance, Washington appears to face four deeply problematic options, all stemming from a stalled regime change policy.
The US could simply walk away, but a retreat after years of maximalist rhetoric seems a profound political risk. It could launch a military strike, but such an illegal act risks global condemnation and historic embarrassment if it fails. It could attempt a strangling blockade, a lengthy act of economic war with a high military cost. Or it could order a full invasion, risking a protracted conflict it likely does not want.
Given the severe downsides of each confrontational path, observers are left to speculate about a quieter fifth possibility. A negotiated off ramp built on saving face.
This would follow the recent model seen between the US and Iran. It might involve a pre arranged, symbolic action. A single strike on a low value target. Maduro could then frame himself as the defender who withstood foreign aggression.
A US president could present the action as decisive strength.
No real war would be fought. Both sides could claim a form of resilience. It would offer the US a path to de escalate from a failing policy without an overt admission of defeat.
The notable silence in Caracas, therefore, may not signal weakness. It might reflect the tense quiet of exploratory talks, where the discussion is not about victory, but about whether a mutually acceptable retreat can even be designed. The psyop story of surrender is likely just noise.
The real, hushed conversation could be about finding a face saving exit before it is too late.