In geopolitics, timing is policy. And if we want to understand why President Trump will not move decisively on Venezuela yet, we need to stop treating Caracas as a standalone crisis. Venezuela is not an isolated Latin American problem; it is a downstream theater, derivative of a much larger great-power settlement that must be resolved first. But, Ukraine is the keystone. Hence, until that file is closed, Venezuela remains frozen.

From a reasonable analytical perspective, the logic is brutal but coherent: Ukraine first, Venezuela second.

Any premature American move against Dictator and Drug Cartel Leader, Nicolas Maduro, while Russia still views Ukraine as existential would only harden Moscow’s incentives to keep Venezuela alive as a pressure point—sanctions evasion, intelligence friction, asymmetric signaling, and proof that the United States cannot even dominate its own hemisphere.

Doubtlessly, once Ukraine is “resolved” on Russian terms, that incentive disappears.

In my opinion, what President Putin ultimately seeks is not peace but strategic geometry. A viable end state for Moscow would lock in Russian control over parts of eastern Ukraine, secure access around Zaporizhzhia, guarantee commercial and maritime depth tied to Odesa (concerns dating back to the time of ‘Catherine the Great’), and—above all—formally bar Ukraine from ever entering NATO.

On this point, there is no ambiguity. NATO expansion is the red line. By contrast, Russian leadership could plausibly tolerate Ukraine’s entry into the European Union, provided that integration remains economic rather than military. Markets can be managed. Missiles cannot.

Even if such an outcome is deeply uncomfortable for the Baltic states—particularly Estonia and Latvia, where sizable Russian-speaking minorities could be........

© The Times of Israel (Blogs)