美國對委內瑞拉採取強硬行動，甚至被外界形容為「攻擊」或「直接介入」，其背後原因並非單一事件所致，而是長期累積的多重結構性矛盾集中爆發的結果。從表面上看，美國強調的是毒品走私、國家安全與邊境危機，但若進一步拆解，其核心其實牽涉到能源戰略、地緣政治競逐，以及對馬杜洛政權的意識形態對抗。

在美國官方論述中，最重要的正當性來源是「禁毒與國家安全」。美國司法部長期指控委內瑞拉現任領導人馬杜洛及其核心權力圈，主導所謂的「太陽集團」（Cartel de los Soles），將國家機器與毒品犯罪結合，系統性地向美國輸送古柯鹼與芬太尼。美方更進一步將該集團與近年在拉丁美洲迅速擴張的跨國犯罪組織「阿拉瓜火車」連結，並將其定性為具備恐怖組織性質的威脅，認為這些網絡已滲透至美國南部邊境，直接危及國內安全。在此框架下，美國宣稱其行動本質上是執法行為，是為了執行司法部對馬杜洛提出的販毒與洗錢起訴，以及相關的國際逮捕令。

移民問題同樣被納入官方說法的重要一環。美國政界，尤其是川普陣營，長期指控馬杜洛政府刻意利用社會崩潰，將監獄囚犯與精神病患「外送」至美國邊境，藉此製造移民與治安危機，對美國內政施壓。這種論述成功將對委內瑞拉的行動，與美國國內高度敏感的邊境與移民議題連結，爭取更多政治支持。

然而，在這些公開理由之下，更深層的動機仍然離不開能源與地緣政治。委內瑞拉擁有全球規模最大的已探明石油儲量，雖然多為開採與精煉成本極高的超重油，但其戰略價值依然無可取代。對美國而言，影響甚至重新掌控委內瑞拉的能源體系，不僅能在全球油市中取得更大話語權，也有助於確保自身及盟友的長期能源安全，特別是在中東局勢高度不穩、俄羅斯能源被制裁的背景下，拉美能源的重要性顯著上升。

同時，委內瑞拉也是大國角力的前線之一。馬杜洛政權與中國、俄羅斯、伊朗等美國主要戰略競爭對手維持緊密合作，中國更透過貸款換石油、基礎建設投資與技術支援，逐步擴大在拉丁美洲的影響力。美國對委內瑞拉施壓，不僅是針對一個政權，更被視為在西半球遏制中國地緣擴張、重申「後院不容他國染指」戰略底線的重要行動。

意識形態因素亦不可忽視。馬杜洛長期將自己塑造成反美、反帝國主義的象徵，延續查維茲時代的社會主義敘事，並將國內經濟失敗歸咎於美國制裁與資本主義壓迫。這種論述在部分拉美左翼勢力中仍具有動員力，對美國主導的民主與自由市場價值形成挑戰。從華府角度來看，若放任這種模式持續存在，可能削弱美國在區域內的政治影響力與制度吸引力。

因此，美國對委內瑞拉的行動，本質上是一場多層次的政治與戰略操作。它一方面以禁毒、反恐與邊境安全作為對內與對外的合法化說辭，另一方面則試圖藉由政權更迭或高度施壓，重新塑造委內瑞拉的能源版圖，削弱中國與其他對手在拉美的影響，同時消除一個公開挑戰美國主導秩序的象徵性政權。正因如此，外界對美國宣稱的「民主與穩定」目標始終保持質疑，認為在理想敘事背後，更現實的考量仍是資源、權力與地緣政治利益的重新分配。

The reasons behind the United States’ actions against Venezuela—sometimes described by observers as an “attack” or direct intervention—are highly complex and cannot be attributed to a single factor. Rather, they are the result of multiple long-standing structural tensions converging at once. On the surface, Washington emphasizes drug trafficking, national security, and border control, but a deeper analysis reveals that the core issues revolve around energy strategy, geopolitical competition, and ideological confrontation with the Maduro government.

In the official U.S. narrative, the primary justification lies in counter-narcotics and national security concerns. The U.S. Department of Justice has for years accused Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his inner circle of leading what is known as the “Cartel of the Suns,” effectively merging state power with transnational drug trafficking networks. According to U.S. authorities, this network has systematically facilitated the flow of cocaine and fentanyl into the United States. Washington has further linked the cartel to rapidly expanding criminal organizations in Latin America, such as “Tren de Aragua,” which the U.S. portrays as having terrorist-like characteristics and as posing a direct threat to U.S. homeland security through infiltration of the southern border. Within this framework, U.S. actions are presented as law-enforcement operations aimed at executing indictments and international arrest warrants issued against Maduro on charges including drug trafficking and money laundering.

Immigration has also been folded into the official rationale. U.S. politicians—particularly figures associated with Donald Trump—have repeatedly accused the Maduro government of deliberately exploiting Venezuela’s social collapse by emptying prisons and psychiatric institutions and pushing inmates and patients toward the U.S. border, thereby manufacturing a migration and public safety crisis to pressure Washington. This framing has allowed U.S. actions toward Venezuela to be closely tied to the highly sensitive domestic issues of border security and illegal immigration, helping to consolidate political support at home.

Beneath these public arguments, however, lie deeper considerations of energy and geopolitics. Venezuela possesses the world’s largest proven oil reserves. Although much of this oil is extra-heavy crude that is costly to extract and refine, its strategic value remains immense. From the U.S. perspective, influencing or regaining control over Venezuela’s energy sector would enhance its leverage over global oil markets and supply chains, strengthening long-term energy security for itself and its allies. This has become particularly significant amid instability in the Middle East and sanctions on Russian energy, which have elevated the strategic importance of Latin American oil resources.

At the same time, Venezuela has become a frontline in great-power rivalry. The Maduro government maintains close ties with U.S. strategic competitors such as China, Russia, and Iran. China, in particular, has expanded its influence through oil-for-loans arrangements, infrastructure investment, and technical assistance, steadily deepening its footprint in Latin America. From Washington’s viewpoint, pressuring Venezuela is not only about a single regime but also about curbing China’s growing geopolitical presence in the Western Hemisphere and reaffirming a long-standing U.S. strategic red line against rival powers gaining influence in its traditional sphere.

Ideological conflict also plays a significant role. Maduro has consistently portrayed himself as a symbol of anti-Americanism and anti-imperialism, continuing the socialist narrative established under Hugo Chávez. He has blamed domestic economic collapse on U.S. sanctions and capitalist exploitation, a message that still resonates with segments of the Latin American left. For the United States, allowing this model to persist risks undermining its political influence and the appeal of democratic and free-market values in the region.

In essence, U.S. actions toward Venezuela represent a multi-layered political and strategic maneuver. On one level, they are framed as efforts to combat drug trafficking, terrorism, and border insecurity. On another, they aim to reshape Venezuela’s energy landscape, weaken the influence of geopolitical rivals—particularly China—and neutralize a regime that openly challenges U.S.-led regional and global order. It is for this reason that many observers remain skeptical of Washington’s stated goals of “democracy” and “stability,” arguing that behind the idealistic rhetoric lie more pragmatic calculations centered on resources, power, and the reconfiguration of geopolitical interests.