By: Abby Finkenauer

Read in: The Hill

Earlier this month, the U.S. took an extraordinary and dangerous step in Venezuela. Acting without congressional authorization, President Trump ordered special forces to seize that country’s president. Days later, Trump declared, with no mention of congressional support, that “one way or the other” the U.S. is “going to have Greenland.”

The reality in Venezuela alone should give Americans pause. This is not a routine foreign policy decision. It leaves in its wake legal, diplomatic and humanitarian consequences.

We should not be surprised that we ended up here. Over the last year, this administration, aided by a Congress that failed to exercise its oversight responsibilities, allowed sweeping cuts to diplomacy, stabilization programs and humanitarian foreign assistance. Those cuts hollowed out the civilian tools the U.S. relies on when fragile situations deteriorate. They did not create Venezuela’s instability, but they left the U.S. with far fewer options in this moment.

This represents a sharp break from the approach I saw as a member of Congress and later at the State Department, when bipartisan majorities still recognized the value of investing in diplomacy, civil society and conflict prevention. Those tools were imperfect and often underfunded, but they existed, and they gave the U.S. options short of force when crises escalated.

What is unfolding in Venezuela reflects a new moment, one in which those guardrails have been stripped away and executive power is being exercised with zero restraint.

That context matters when assessing the situation on the ground. Some are calling Trump a hero for taking a hard line on Venezuela, but that claim does not withstand scrutiny. You cannot credibly posture as tough on corruption or drug trafficking while pardoning the former Honduran president, a leader linked to the very abuses this administration claims to oppose. That is not moral clarity. It is selective outrage.

It is obvious every day that goes by that this moment is not really about democracy or drug trafficking. If it were, U.S. policy would be consistent and grounded in law. Instead, it is transactional, especially when oil enters the equation. We have been here before, and it did not end well.

What makes this moment especially alarming is not just the instability once again initiated by this administration’s decisions, but the lack of oversight meant to contain it. Congress spent 2025 looking away, and now it is being sidelined entirely. In Iraq, Congress at least had a vote. Today, major foreign policy decisions are being made without authorization, accountability or a credible plan for what comes next.

At the same time, the civilian infrastructure that could reduce chaos has been dismantled. U.S. funding for civil society, governance and human rights programs in Venezuela and across the region has been halted altogether as USAID has been dismantled and State Department grants cancelled.

Reporting from Venezuelan civil society coalitions shows that roughly 60 percent of local organizations surveyed were forced to shut down programs entirely, and more than 120,000 beneficiaries across Latin America and the Caribbean lost access to civilian assistance when funding disappeared. These programs included legal services, human rights monitoring and support for independent media and civic participation — exactly the tools needed to reduce volatility during political transitions.

Six months ago, Secretary of State Marco Rubio eliminated the Conflict Stabilization Operations bureau, the office specifically designed to prevent violence and help countries move from crisis toward stability. Together, these decisions stripped away the very tools meant to manage political transitions towards peace.

That leaves a vacuum. And vacuums in foreign policy do not stay empty. They are filled by disorder, by violence or by military force. None of those outcomes produce democracy. What they produce spills across borders and eventually reaches home.

A different approach is both possible and necessary. It does not mean excusing authoritarianism or abandoning accountability. It means restoring the civilian tools that prevent crises from spiraling into violence and military confrontation.

That starts with Congress reasserting its role, rebuilding diplomatic and stabilization capacity and reinvesting in civil society organizations that support human rights, independent media and the rule of law. These efforts are not side projects. They are what make peaceful transitions and long-term stability achievable, especially in countries already under strain.

Venezuela is a template for this administration’s foreign policy, and the consequences are not abstract. They show up in a destabilized world and in human suffering that cannot be undone once it begins. The costs of this moment will be determined not just by what happens next in Venezuela or Greenland, but by how Congress and the public decide to respond.

Abby Finkenauer is a former member of Congress and former U.S. special envoy for Global Youth at the Department of State. She is a co-founder & principal of The Alliance for Diplomacy and Justice.