Donald Trump has acknowledged that he held discussions with major American oil companies both before and after the United States carried out its military operation in Venezuela, even as members of the US Congress said they were given no advance warning and were informed only after the mission had concluded. The disclosure has intensified scrutiny of the administration’s decision-making, particularly after Trump publicly shared an image showing the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his wife, transforming what had been a covert operation into a highly visible political moment.
In the immediate aftermath of the strikes in Caracas, the Trump administration faced sharp criticism from Democratic lawmakers, who argued that the lack of consultation undermined congressional authority. Several legislators said not only Congress as a whole, but even the Senate Armed Services Committee, was kept completely unaware of the operation while it was underway. According to lawmakers, this represented a serious departure from established norms governing military action and oversight.
Officials confirmed that members of the so-called “Gang of Eight” — the top Republican and Democratic leaders from the House and Senate, along with the chairs and ranking members of the intelligence committees — were briefed only after the operation that led to Maduro’s arrest had already been completed. The delay in notification has fuelled accusations that the administration intentionally bypassed traditional channels to avoid scrutiny.
The secrecy surrounding the mission has also sparked allegations online that economic interests, rather than purely national security concerns, may have influenced the decision to strike. Critics have pointed to Trump’s own statements highlighting Venezuela’s oil reserves as evidence that commercial considerations played a central role in the operation.
The military action unfolded early on Saturday, with US Delta Force units and airstrikes targeting strategic military installations in and around Caracas. Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, were captured and flown to New York to face federal drug-related charges. In the wake of their removal, Vice President Delcy RodrÃguez was sworn in as interim leader and has reportedly signalled a willingness to cooperate with Washington.
Trump has repeatedly framed the operation as a decisive blow against “narco-terrorism,” while also stating that the United States would temporarily “run” Venezuela to ensure what he described as a safe and orderly transition. He has openly stressed the importance of Venezuela’s oil wealth, claiming that American involvement would generate significant profits and that the operation would not burden US taxpayers.
Lawmakers from both parties have raised concerns over the lack of advance notice, with some Democrats citing the War Powers Resolution, which requires presidents to notify Congress within 48 hours of initiating hostilities and generally expects consultation ahead of major military actions. Trump has defended his approach, describing the mission as “trigger-based” and arguing that Congress has a tendency to leak sensitive information, according to reports by CBS News.
Media reports have indicated that only the Gang of Eight received briefings after the strikes had already begun, a move confirmed by The Guardian. Administration officials have attempted to justify the lack of prior notification by characterising the operation as a law enforcement action rather than a traditional act of war, a distinction they argue reduced the need for standard congressional oversight.
Trump’s comments about oil companies have further intensified the debate. When asked whether energy firms were consulted ahead of the operation, he confirmed that he had spoken with major US oil companies both before and after the strikes. Speaking aboard Air Force One, he said these companies were eager to return to Venezuela and rebuild the country’s deteriorated oil infrastructure, according to reporting by the BBC.
Trump has insisted that the operation would effectively pay for itself through future oil revenues. Experts note that these discussions took place against the backdrop of long-standing US sanctions and restrictions on Venezuelan oil exports. After the strike, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said American companies were keen to invest in Venezuela, a statement reported by Reuters.
Adding to the controversy, Politico reported that around the time of the January 3 operation, the Trump administration had informed US oil companies that they could potentially recover assets expropriated decades earlier. However, this would be conditional on their agreement to reinvest heavily in restoring Venezuela’s damaged oil sector.
According to US officials familiar with the outreach, any compensation for seized rigs, pipelines and facilities would be tied to new capital investments and long-term operational commitments inside Venezuela. Taken together, the sequence of events has sharpened perceptions that the future of Venezuela’s oil industry is being shaped not only by Washington’s security calculations, but also by the interests of powerful American corporations — a reality underscored by Trump’s own admission that oil executives were consulted while Congress was left uninformed.
