The U.S. government provided a confidential briefing to the "Gang of Eight" after the Venezuela operation, with public revelations exposing the political financial backers behind the scenes.

List of Key Chapter Titles

1. U.S. Government Provides Post-Facto Briefing to Congressional "Gang of Eight" on Venezuelan Military Operation
2. Domestic Political Game: Sharp Opposition Between the Two Parties' Positions
3. Policy and Capital Linkage: Rapid Evolution from Military Action to Energy Deployment
4. The Deep-Seated Interest Loop of "Political Donations - Policy Tilt - Commercial Returns"
5. Risk Analysis
6. Response Recommendations

Document Introduction

This report aims to systematically analyze the series of complex dynamics triggered by the U.S. Trump administration's military action against Venezuela and the arrest of its President Maduro on January 5, 2026, without prior notification to Congress. This action and its subsequent developments not only exposed the profound rift and intense partisan struggle between the executive and legislative branches within the United States but also clearly demonstrated how specific policies rapidly pave the way for capital, revealing the operational logic of the "military-capital" hybrid intervention model and the "political-business complex" behind it. Based on extensive open sources, including mainstream media reports, government official statements, corporate reports, and social media analysis, the report dissects the event across multiple levels and dimensions.

The report first details the restoration of the event's core link: the process where senior U.S. government officials conducted a post-facto classified briefing for the statutory "Gang of Eight" and key committee leaders within a sensitive compartmented information facility in Congress. This move drew fierce criticism from bipartisan lawmakers over procedural legitimacy issues, with Democrats particularly questioning its legal basis, calling it a "clear violation of the law." The briefing failed to quell the controversy, instead shifting the focus from the military action itself to deeper economic and strategic deployments.

Subsequently, the report delves into the domestic political game in the United States. Republicans generally defended the action, emphasizing its legality, precision, and limited objectives; Democrats fiercely criticized the government for misleading Congress, having vague plans, and warned of historical lessons. This sharp partisan struggle highlights how foreign military actions can become tools in domestic political struggles under polarized politics.

The third part of the report focuses on the astonishing speed of linkage between policy and capital. President Trump and senior administration officials immediately sent clear signals after the action, declaring they would encourage and potentially compensate U.S. oil companies to invest tens of billions of dollars in rebuilding Venezuela's energy infrastructure. This strong policy signal quickly stimulated the capital market, with related energy stocks surging accordingly. Private capital (such as funds managed by former Chevron executives) rapidly planned billions of dollars in investments, while traditional energy giants reacted differently based on their historical asset situations. Simultaneously, financial capital represented by Elliott Management Corporation is vying for control of Citgo Petroleum Company, the core U.S. asset of Venezuela's state-owned oil company PDVSA, through U.S. judicial procedures, with its actions highly coordinated with the government's energy reconstruction policy.

Building on this, the report reveals a deeper interest loop of "political donations - policy tilt - commercial returns." Extensive public evidence shows that the fossil fuel industry is deeply intertwined with specific political forces through massive political donations (e.g., spending approximately $450 million in the 2024 election cycle), policy circle personnel holding shares, and corporate political investments explicitly aimed at serving "policy interests." The roles of hedge fund tycoons like Paul Singer exemplify how the "political-business complex" shapes sanction policies through political investments, uses judicial procedures to freeze assets, and ultimately seeks substantive control over strategic energy assets, forming a coherent chain of action.

Based on the above analysis, the report proposes three strategic-level risk assessments in its fourth part: First, international rules and order face significant risks of being "instrumentalized" and "abandoned." The "military-legal-financial" composite intervention model, which uses force to pave the way and then uses legal and financial tools to "legally" plunder the target country's assets, severely erodes the basic principles of international law. Second, the global energy geopolitical landscape and supply chain security face restructuring pressure. If the U.S. model of "breaking the situation" through political-military means and "taking over" with capital and technology succeeds, it will strengthen its control over key nodes of global oil and gas resources, intensifying the politicization and weaponization of energy supply. Third, the "interest group-ization" and "short-termism" of U.S. domestic and foreign policies are intensifying, potentially leading it to replicate similar models in multiple global locations based on "low-cost, high-return" calculations, becoming the greatest source of chaos and uncertainty, significantly increasing the difficulty for all countries, including China, to safeguard overseas interests and global strategic stability.

Finally, from the perspective of maintaining international order stability and safeguarding national development interests, the fifth part of the report proposes multi-dimensional response strategy recommendations, including: clearly upholding the basic principles of international law, uniting the international community to defend the core role of the United Nations; accelerating the diversification of the global energy cooperation network, enhancing supply chain resilience to ensure national energy security; deepening solidarity and cooperation with developing countries, providing "constructive alternative solutions" to hedge against intervention models; strengthening international public opinion guidance and legal discourse construction, deconstructing the hypocritical narratives and underlying interest logic of intervention actions.

List of Key Chapter Titles

1. U.S. Government Provides Post-Facto Briefing to Congressional "Gang of Eight" on Venezuelan Military Operation
2. Domestic Political Game: Sharp Opposition Between the Two Parties' Positions
3. Policy and Capital Linkage: Rapid Evolution from Military Action to Energy Deployment
4. The Deep-Seated Interest Loop of "Political Donations - Policy Tilt - Commercial Returns"
5. Risk Analysis
6. Response Recommendations

Document Introduction

This report aims to systematically analyze the series of complex dynamics triggered by the U.S. Trump administration's military action against Venezuela and the arrest of its President Maduro on January 5, 2026, without prior notification to Congress. This action and its subsequent developments not only exposed the profound rift and intense partisan struggle between the executive and legislative branches within the United States but also clearly demonstrated how specific policies rapidly pave the way for capital, revealing the operational logic of the "military-capital" hybrid intervention model and the "political-business complex" behind it. Based on extensive open sources, including mainstream media reports, government official statements, corporate reports, and social media analysis, the report dissects the event across multiple levels and dimensions.

The report first details the restoration of the event's core link: the process where senior U.S. government officials conducted a post-facto classified briefing for the statutory "Gang of Eight" and key committee leaders within a sensitive compartmented information facility in Congress. This move drew fierce criticism from bipartisan lawmakers over procedural legitimacy issues, with Democrats particularly questioning its legal basis, calling it a "clear violation of the law." The briefing failed to quell the controversy, instead shifting the focus from the military action itself to deeper economic and strategic deployments.

Subsequently, the report delves into the domestic political game in the United States. Republicans generally defended the action, emphasizing its legality, precision, and limited objectives; Democrats fiercely criticized the government for misleading Congress, having vague plans, and warned of historical lessons. This sharp partisan struggle highlights how foreign military actions can become tools in domestic political struggles under polarized politics.

The third part of the report focuses on the astonishing speed of linkage between policy and capital. President Trump and senior administration officials immediately sent clear signals after the action, declaring they would encourage and potentially compensate U.S. oil companies to invest tens of billions of dollars in rebuilding Venezuela's energy infrastructure. This strong policy signal quickly stimulated the capital market, with related energy stocks surging accordingly. Private capital (such as funds managed by former Chevron executives) rapidly planned billions of dollars in investments, while traditional energy giants reacted differently based on their historical asset situations. Simultaneously, financial capital represented by Elliott Management Corporation is vying for control of Citgo Petroleum Company, the core U.S. asset of Venezuela's state-owned oil company PDVSA, through U.S. judicial procedures, with its actions highly coordinated with the government's energy reconstruction policy.

Building on this, the report reveals a deeper interest loop of "political donations - policy tilt - commercial returns." Extensive public evidence shows that the fossil fuel industry is deeply intertwined with specific political forces through massive political donations (e.g., spending approximately $450 million in the 2024 election cycle), policy circle personnel holding shares, and corporate political investments explicitly aimed at serving "policy interests." The roles of hedge fund tycoons like Paul Singer exemplify how the "political-business complex" shapes sanction policies through political investments, uses judicial procedures to freeze assets, and ultimately seeks substantive control over strategic energy assets, forming a coherent chain of action.

Based on the above analysis, the report proposes three strategic-level risk assessments in its fourth part: First, international rules and order face significant risks of being "instrumentalized" and "abandoned." The "military-legal-financial" composite intervention model, which uses force to pave the way and then uses legal and financial tools to "legally" plunder the target country's assets, severely erodes the basic principles of international law. Second, the global energy geopolitical landscape and supply chain security face restructuring pressure. If the U.S. model of "breaking the situation" through political-military means and "taking over" with capital and technology succeeds, it will strengthen its control over key nodes of global oil and gas resources, intensifying the politicization and weaponization of energy supply. Third, the "interest group-ization" and "short-termism" of U.S. domestic and foreign policies are intensifying, potentially leading it to replicate similar models in multiple global locations based on "low-cost, high-return" calculations, becoming the greatest source of chaos and uncertainty, significantly increasing the difficulty for all countries, including China, to safeguard overseas interests and global strategic stability.

Finally, from the perspective of maintaining international order stability and safeguarding national development interests, the fifth part of the report proposes multi-dimensional response strategy recommendations, including: clearly upholding the basic principles of international law, uniting the international community to defend the core role of the United Nations; accelerating the diversification of the global energy cooperation network, enhancing supply chain resilience to ensure national energy security; deepening solidarity and cooperation with developing countries, providing "constructive alternative solutions" to hedge against intervention models; strengthening international public opinion guidance and legal discourse construction, deconstructing the hypocritical narratives and underlying interest logic of intervention actions.