A new flashpoint may be emerging in U.S.–Venezuela relations after President Donald Trump said the United States struck a drug boat loading facility inside Venezuela, an assertion that—if confirmed—would mark the first known U.S. land operation on Venezuelan soil since Washington intensified pressure on President Nicolás Maduro.

Speaking Monday from Florida, Trump described what he called a direct hit on a dock area used by drug traffickers, saying the operation destroyed both vessels and the infrastructure supporting them.

“There was a major explosion in the dock area where they load the boats with drugs,” Trump said. “We hit the boats, and we hit the implementation area. That operation site is no longer there.”

The remarks immediately raised questions across diplomatic, military, and intelligence circles, as no U.S. agency or Venezuelan authority has publicly confirmed the incident.

Despite Trump’s blunt description, the White House, Pentagon, and Central Intelligence Agency declined to comment when asked for clarification. The Venezuelan government also remained silent, offering no official response through its communications ministry.

That lack of confirmation has fueled speculation that the strike—if it occurred—was conducted as a covert U.S. operation in Venezuela, limiting what officials are legally allowed to disclose.

When pressed on whether the CIA was involved, Trump refused to name the agency responsible.

“I know exactly who carried it out,” he said, “but I don’t want to say.”

Trump has previously acknowledged authorizing CIA covert actions against Venezuela, particularly those targeting drug trafficking networks and individuals tied to Maduro’s government.

Trump’s comments triggered online speculation that he may have been referring to a chemical plant fire in Venezuela’s Zulia state on Christmas Eve. The facility, operated by Primazol, suffered a blaze that local residents said was preceded by an explosion.

However, the company quickly denied any connection, stating the fire was extinguished rapidly and remains under investigation. Primazol also rejected rumors that the incident involved U.S. military or intelligence activity.

Residents near the site reported smelling chlorine and seeing flames, but no independent evidence has emerged linking the incident to U.S. strikes or drug interdiction operations.

The alleged strike fits into a broader U.S. strategy focused on counter-narcotics operations in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific, regions frequently cited as key transit routes for cocaine shipments linked to Venezuela.

Over the past year, the Pentagon has:

While U.S. officials argue the campaign has disrupted major trafficking networks, it has also drawn intense congressional oversight, particularly regarding civilian casualties and adherence to international law.

Earlier this month, lawmakers were briefed on a September incident in which a U.S. strike killed 11 people, followed by a second strike after survivors were detected. Some Democratic lawmakers questioned whether the follow-up strike complied with U.S. rules of engagement.

According to earlier reporting, the Trump administration has been preparing a new phase of Venezuela-related operations, signaling a shift from primarily maritime enforcement toward more aggressive, possibly onshore actions.

Two U.S. officials familiar with planning said covert operations were expected to be the first step, allowing Washington to escalate pressure while maintaining plausible deniability.

Trump has repeatedly framed these efforts as necessary to combat:

The administration has also accused Caracas of using drug profits to stabilize its grip on power.

The alleged operation comes amid a significant U.S. military buildup in the Caribbean, including:

Supporters argue the buildup deters organized crime and weakens drug cartels. Critics warn it risks escalation, miscalculation, and broader regional instability, especially if operations extend further into sovereign territory.

If Trump’s account is accurate, the strike would represent a major turning point in U.S. foreign policy toward Venezuela, blurring the line between counter-drug enforcement and direct intervention.

The unanswered questions are significant:

For now, the absence of confirmation from both governments suggests the situation is highly sensitive—and far from over.

What is clear is that the U.S.–Venezuela standoff has entered a more dangerous phase, one where covert action, regional security, and global drug enforcement increasingly collide.