The Washington Post Editorial Board Endorses Trump's Coup In Venezuela.

The Washington Post Editorial Board Cheers On Trump's Kidnapping Of Venezuela's President.

The mainstream media’s manufacturing consent for every war begins to make more sense anytime a mainstream American paper publishes an Op-Ed for its editorial board, exposing them as bloodthirsty maniacs.

There could be no better example of this than the Washington Post’s latest neocon screed from the editorial board titled, “Justice For Venezuela”.

Cheering On Starvation Sanctions And Bombing Venezuelans.

The editorial board of the Washington Post pretends that Trump’s kidnapping of Venezuela’s president, Nicolas Maduro, will help Venezuelans, claiming that U.S. enemies Russia, Cuba, and Iran “backed their oppressor”, and claimed that they will be grateful to the U.S.because it “effected his removal”.

The article claimed that Venezuela was better off before the election of Hugo Chavez, claiming that it was “a relatively prosperous and democratic society” before his election, without mentioning that, as journalist Aaron Mate noted , “Under Chávez, unemployment was reduced by half, extreme poverty sharply reduced, and GDP more than doubled.”

While pretending to care about Venezuelans, the editorial goes on to support starvation sanctions that target the Venezuelan people and dropping bombs on Venezuelans.

The article claimed that Joe Biden’s removal of some sanctions on Venezuela was a “show of weakness” and cheered on the regime change bombing and kidnapping of Maduro as “an important message to tin-pot dictators in Latin America and the world”.

In reality, the sanctions that Washington Post’s editorial board cheers on targeted the country’s oil exports, which economists Jeffery Sachs and Mark Weisbrot noted, provided the financing for “nearly all of the foreign exchange that is needed to import medicine, food, medical equipment, spare parts, and equipment needed for electricity generation, water systems, or transportation” adding that, “any sanctions that reduce export earnings, and therefore government revenue, thereby reduce the imports of these essential and, in many cases, life-saving goods”.

Sachs and Weisbrot documented that from 2017-2019 the sanctions killed 40,000 people and Weisbrot noted that the sanctions that followed were even harsher, writing in the LA Times, “things got even worse, as the U.S. cut off the country from the international financial system and oil exports, froze billions of dollars of assets and imposed ‘secondary sanctions’ on countries that tried to do business with Venezuela.”

Following the new round of even harsher sanctions, former UN official Alfred de Zayas found that they had killed 100,000 Venezuelans and the UN documented that, “the economic blockade of Venezuela and the freezing of Central Bank assets have exacerbated pre-existing economic and humanitarian situation by preventing the earning of revenues and the use of resources to develop and maintain infrastructure and for social support programs, which has a devastating effect on the whole population of Venezuela, especially those in extreme poverty, women, children, medical workers, people with disabilities or life-threatening or chronic diseases, and the indigenous population”.

Furthermore, the editorial endorses Trump’s bombing of Venezuela, claiming that it was a “unquestionable tactical success”, “a clear reminder that America’s military, intelligence and cyber capabilities are second to none” and “a major victory for American interests”.

The Op-Ed boasts that, “there were no American deaths, although some U.S. service members were injured” without mentioning that the operation killed at least 40 Venezuelans, including civilians, including “an airstrike hit a three-story civilian apartment complex and knocked out an exterior wall” and killed 80-year-old civilian Rosa González and “seriously wounded a second person.”

The New York Times wrote that Rosa González’s nephew, Wilman González, “showed journalists where the U.S. ordnance had hit. Asked where he would go now that he lost his home, he said simply, ‘I don’t know.’ He spoke little as he bent down and searched for whatever valuables he could salvage. He picked up an old umbrella and carried a set of drawers.”

The New York Times added that, “One neighbor, a 70-year-old man named Jorge who declined to give his last name, said he lost everything in the airstrike” adding, “One man, who gave his name as Javier, blamed greed for the attack on Venezuela, an apparent reference to the Trump administration’s stated desire to let American companies take control of Venezuelan oil fields. The lives of people like him, he said, meant nothing.”

Similarly, the lives of Venezuelan’s destroyed by the bombing mean nothing to the bloodthirsty warmongers on the Washington Post’s editorial board.

Pictured Above: Aftermath of the U.S. strike on a civilian apartment complex in Venezuela.

Cheering On More Neo-Con Wars.

The main justification given in the Washington Post editorial board for the kidnapping of Maduro and regime change in Venezuela is that it will lead to regime change in other countries designated as official American enemies by pro-war Neo-cons, namely Iran and Cuba.

The outlet wrote, “Trump had telegraphed for months that Maduro could not remain in power, yet Venezuela’s illegitimate leader clung on. What are Iranian leaders thinking now as they consider how to respond to widespread anti-government protests? Are the communists in Cuba sleeping well after Secretary of State Marco Rubio put them on notice Saturday?”

For context, Israel and America are attempting to weaponize and potentially infiltrate protests in Iran to further the long-time Israeli goal of regime change.

The Israeli newspaper Haaretz previously reported that “a large-scale digital influence campaign in Persian” was launched by Israeli intelligence, to promote the son of the former Shah of Iran, Reza Pahlavi, who has close links to Israel.

Harretz reported that, “While Pahlavi declares that he’s not running for any position, in recent years a social media campaign has been calling for the monarchy’s restoration, with Reza on the throne. According to the sources, part of this effort is based on a network of fake accounts originating in Israel”.

Similarly, the University of Toronto’s Citizen lab previously uncovered a bout network run by Israeli intelligence which “advanced a narrative of regime change in Iran” and tried to stir up violent regime change on the ground during the U.S./Israeli bombing of Iran in June including with accounts that, “told followers to head to ATMs to withdraw money, emphasized that the Islamic Republic was ‘stealing our money to escape with its officials,’ and urged followers to rise up against the regime”.

Moving to the current protests, journalist Robert Inlakesh reported that after “Shopkeepers and merchants demonstrated against their government’s mismanagement of the economy, which has led to a deepening of the ongoing inflation crisis in the country” Iran, “Israeli and Iranian opposition accounts across social media began pushing old videos of riots to claim that a major uprising was occurring”.

Inlakesh noted, “Despite the absence of major social unrest and the demonstrations being almost entirely non-violent, a propaganda campaign online depicted a reality entirely different from the one unfolding on the ground. This became particularly evident when Israel’s former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett uploaded a video declaring support for the alleged Iranian uprising, signaling that the situation was likely to escalate.”

At the same time, the X account- Mossad Farsi- widely believed to be operated by the Israeli Mossad, claimed that Mossad agents were “with you in the field as well” in regard to the protest, and former Secretary of State and CIA director Mike Pompeo claimed that there were “Mossad agents walking beside” the protestors.

Robert Inlakesh reported on a violent pro-regime change element that attempted to hijack the peaceful economic-based protests in Iran, writing that “the situation suddenly deteriorated when armed agitators opened fire on security forces and attempted to storm government buildings, armories, and police stations. On January 1, two Iranian police officers were murdered, and three rioters were also reportedly shot dead” and “a new wave of violent attacks on security forces occurred, along with an attempt to storm another armory in Marvdasht. Other incidents included lone arsonists setting fire to cars in Qom, as well as armed attacks and small groups of violent agents throwing stones at police officers,” adding that, “all the major unions that had originally supported the peaceful protests issued statements denouncing the wave of unrest and riots.”

Israel’s i24 news admitted that the violent aspect of the protests “likely received guidance” from foreign intelligence, suggesting that American and or Israeli intelligence was trying to infiltrate the protest and turn them toward regime change.

At the same time, “Mossad Farsi” and Mike Pompeo’s public announcement of Mossad involvement on the ground appears to be an attempt to get the Iranian government to crack down on the protestors, to be used as a pretext for war.

Shortly after this, Trump went to TruthSocial to threaten war with Iran in response to any crackdown on protestors, writing, “If Iran shots and violently kills peaceful protesters, which is their custom, the United States of America will come to their rescue. We are locked and loaded and ready to go. Thank you for your attention to this matter”.

The Washington Post’s editorial board thinks that Trump’s regime change in Venezuela is a sign that he may continue on this path and carry out a regime change war in Iran for Israel.

In regard to Cuba, the regime change in Venezuela was done partly in hopes that it would spill over into more regime change in the region against Neo-con enemies such as Nicaragua and Cuba.

Marco Rubio, Trump’s neo-con Secretary of State boasted, “If I lived in Havana, and I was in the government, I’d be concerned — at least a little bit” after the regime change operation in Venezuela, claiming that, “One of the biggest problems Venezuelans have is they have to declare independence from Cuba” and hoping that without Venezuela, he will get his desired outcome in Cuba as well.

The pro-war editorial board of the Washington Post is hoping for a similar effect from the regime change operation.

Promoting A Pro-War American/Israeli Asset.

The only criticism of Trump’s kidnapping of Maduro offered in the Washington Post Op-Ed is the fact that he suggested he will not install the U.S./Israeli asset Maria Corina Machado as the leader of the country.

The article complained that, “Trump foolishly claimed during a Saturday afternoon news conference that Machado doesn’t have respect within the country” and added, “The ideal outcome would be for María Corina Machado, a Nobel Peace Prize winner and leader of the Venezuelan opposition, to take power. Her Freedom Manifesto — influenced heavily by America’s Constitution — is the best outline for Venezuela’s future.”

What the article failed to mention was the fact that Maria Corina Machado is a U.S. and Israeli asset who has supported everything from military coups to sanctions to U.S. bombing in her own country, and has promised to sell it out to American corporations and Israel.

From 2003-2010, Maria Corina Machado ran the NGO, Sumate, which was , “financed by the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the US Agency for International Development (USAID), and Development Alternatives, Inc. (DAI)”.

During this period, she helped swear in the short-lived U.S.-backed Pedro Carmona government, which was installed after a U.S. backed coup against the country’s elected president, Hugo Chavez, and she later pushed for a referendum against Chavez at the behest of the U.S., which failed when Chavez won by 60 percent of the vote.

As journalist Michelle Ellner has documented, Machado has also:

-worked hand in hand with Washington to justify regime change, using her platform to demand foreign military intervention to “liberate” Venezuela through force.

-pushed for the US sanctions that strangled the economy, knowing exactly who would pay the price: the poor, the sick, the working class.

-helped construct the so-called “interim government,” a Washington-backed puppet show run by a self-appointed “president” who looted Venezuela’s resources abroad while childrenat home went hungry.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has documented Maria Corina Machado’s statements in support of war crimes, including:

-5 December 2025, Machado on CBS Face the Nation: “I say this from Oslo right now, I have dedicated this award to [President Trump] because I think that he finally has put Venezuela in where it should be, in terms of a priority for the United States national security.”

- 30 October 2025, Bloomberg interview: “Military escalation may be the only way... the United States may need to intervene directly”

-17 October 2025, call to Benjamin Netanyahu on Israel’s conduct in Gaza: “The Nobel Peace Prize laureate told the Prime Minister that she greatly appreciates his decisions and resolute actions in the course of the war.”

-October 2025, Fox News interview on U.S. military strikes on civilian vessels: “justified.”

-5 October 2025, interview in The Sunday Times on the U.S. military buildup and extra-judicial assassination strikes against civilian boats: Trump’s strikes are “visionary”. “I totally support his strategy.”

-February 2025, interview with Donald Trump Jr.: “We’re going to kick the government out of the oil sector ... American companies are going to make a lot of money ... forget Saudi Arabia, we have more oil.”

-9 February 2019, interview with EL PAÍS: Maduro will only leave “in the face of a real threat from a more powerful state.”

- February 2014, testimony before U.S. Congress: “The only path left is the use of force.”

Furthermore, Maria Corina Machado has openly offered to sell her country and its resources off to U.S. corporations if she is installed in power, boasting at the Miami Business Forum, “For the U.S., we will turn this criminal hub into a security shield in the heart of the Americas. We will open Venezuela for foreign investment, I am talking about a 1.7 trillion dollar opportunity, not only in oil and gas, … but also in mining, in gold, in infrastructure, power. We will open markets, we will have security for foreign investment, and a massive privatization program that is waiting for you”.

Similarly, she has made an alliance with the Israeli Likud party, signing an inter-party agreement with it in 2020 and cultivating “close ties with the state and the Likud party” and promising in exchange to be “Israel’s closest ally in Latin America” and to “establish Venezuela’s embassy location in Jerusalem”.

All of the context is left out of the Washington Post’s article, which absurdly portrays Machado as being “influenced heavily by America’s Constitution”.

Ignoring Trump’s Stated Motive For Regime Change.

Finally, while pretending that Trump’s kidnapping of Maduro is about “democracy” and “freedom”, the article fails to mention his stated motive for the regime change operation- to take the country’s oil.

In 2023, while on the campaign trail for president, Trump openly admitted his intention of “taking over” Venezuela and taking it’s oil, saying, “When I left, Venezuela was ready to collapse, we would have taken it over, we would have gotten all that oil, it would have been right next door”.

The U.S. representative María Elvira Salazar also outright admitted, “Venezuela for the American oil companies will be a field day because there will be more than a trillion dollars in economic activity. American companies can go in and fix all the oil pipes, the whole oil rigs and everything that has to do with the Venezuelan petroleum companies or everything that has to do with oil and the derivatives”.

Since the kidnapping of Maduro, Trump announced his intention of “taking over” Venezuela, saying that, “A US occupation ‘won’t cost us a penny’ because the US would be reimbursed from the ‘money coming out of the ground … referring to Venezuela’s oil reserves.”

Despite Trump admitting that the regime change is about oil, the Washington Post is still pretending it is about “democracy”.

As journalist Vijay Prashad put it, “The question of Venezuela, then, is not so much about ‘democracy’ (an overused word, which is being stripped of meaning) but about the international class struggle between the right of the Venezuelan people to freely control their oil and gas and that of the US-owned oil companies to dominate Venezuelan natural resources”.

The Washington Post’s neocon screed on Venezuela is just yet another example of the mainstream media’s role in cheering on every war.

---

Note to readers: The Dissident is a reader-supported outlet. If you liked this article, consider becoming a paid subscriber.