For years, whenever Washington talked about a “military option” against Venezuela, the talk was usually limited to the language of foreign policy, deterrence or “regime change.” What was almost never said was that, should such a confrontation begin, its main consequences would be felt not in Caracas, but inside the United States – and more than anywhere else, in the state of Florida.
Now that the United States has carried out a military coup and arrested Nicolás Maduro, the tone of the debate has changed. Proponents of the movement speak of a “decisive moment” or a “necessary intervention.” However, despite the dramatic nature of this action, one reality remains conspicuously absent: stability. Venezuela has not entered a period of calm, and the costs of the intervention have not disappeared. On the contrary, many of the consequences we have long warned about have only been delayed – and Florida remains positioned to pay the price.
There is no doubt that Maduro’s rule has caused widespread suffering to the Venezuelan people. But the removal or arrest of a single individual has never been synonymous with solving a country’s internal crises. The experiences of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya stand clearly before us: military intervention does not eliminate instability; export it. In Venezuela’s case, that instability is now poised to spill out — and Florida is its first destination.
The earliest link of this chain is the economic one. Venezuela has the world’s largest proven oil reserves, and even a limited intervention has already injected uncertainty into global energy markets. The risk of prolonged outages remains high. Gasoline prices in the United States — especially in energy-sensitive states like Florida — are exposed to sharp increases in the coming weeks and months. For working families already under the pressure of inflation, this means sudden increases in commuting costs, more expensive food and tighter household budgets. What appears on paper as a strategic action, in practice hits ordinary people in the pockets.
This economic tension will quickly seep into Florida’s social fabric, a fabric deeply intertwined with Latin America. Small businesses, especially Latino-owned businesses, will face higher energy and transportation costs. Many operate on thin margins and may not withstand prolonged instability. The tourism industry, the backbone of Florida’s economy, will also remain vulnerable. Regional instability and rising anti-American sentiment could reduce Latin American travel to Miami and Orlando; Half-empty hotels, starved restaurants and thousands of lost jobs will be the true face of this “military option”.
But the consequences are not limited to the economy. Maduro’s arrest has not solved Venezuela’s humanitarian crisis; increased the risk of its escalation. Political uncertainty, internal power struggles and the possibility of renewed violence could generate new waves of displacement. For Florida, this means additional pressure on schools, hospitals, the housing market and social services. What was once seen as a distant external crisis will become a daily reality in cities like Miami, Orlando and Tampa.
For Venezuelan-American families, the costs will be the most personal of all. Images of unrest and violence in the cities they still call “home” will shadow their daily lives. Efforts to rescue kin, navigate uncertain borders, and endure a prolonged period of instability will impose heavy emotional and financial burdens—burdens rarely factored into the strategic calculations of war. Miami-Dade and Broward counties, home to more than 200,000 Venezuelan immigrants, will not become centers of celebration, but centers of anxiety and pain.
Florida will also remain on the military front line. The state’s bases will be transformed into logistics hubs and deployment centers, and service members in Florida will face expanded missions. Even a “limited” intervention has long-term human costs: dead, physically injured, and psychologically scarred. A veterans care system already strained for resources will face a new wave of medical needs in the coming years.
All of this is taking place against a staggering financial backdrop. The total cost of US involvement – taking into account military operations, stabilization efforts, humanitarian aid and long-term care for veterans – could still run into the hundreds of billions of dollars. These resources will inevitably be drawn from domestic priorities: education, infrastructure, healthcare and disaster preparedness. In a state like Florida, constantly exposed to devastating hurricanes, such trade-offs are not abstract; can directly endanger lives.
Even from a strategic point of view, the outlook is not encouraging at all. Maduro’s arrest may be turned by Venezuela’s hardline factions into a tool of mobilization and legitimization, discrediting moderate forces and complicating any genuine transition to democracy. Rather than closing a chapter, the intervention may open a new one of instability whose regional and domestic consequences are only now beginning to surface.
Wars can start with a single operation or arrest. But their consequences unfold gradually, unevenly and relentlessly. Today, the United States is not waiting for victory, but for reckoning. And we must be honest enough to admit that we knew in advance what that reckoning would look like.
Timothy Hopper is an American foreign policy writer based in Washington, DC. He holds a degree in international relations from American University and has contributed to publications such as International Policy Digest, Middle East Monitor and Geopolitical Monitor.