A recent commentary piece in The Hill advocates for increased United States intervention in Venezuela, framing the current political climate as a moment for the U.S. to force a transition toward free elections. The author characterizes the current Venezuelan leadership as a 'dictatorship' that requires dismantling, suggesting that the U.S. possesses the necessary leverage to achieve this outcome.

The article references 'Operation Absolute Resolve' as a historical precedent for successful U.S. intervention, implying that a similar strategic approach could be applied to the current situation in Caracas. While the piece emphasizes the urgency of the situation, it does not provide specific details on the diplomatic or military mechanisms that would be employed to 'make' these elections happen, nor does it address potential international legal or geopolitical consequences of such an intervention. The narrative focuses primarily on the moral and strategic imperative for the U.S. to act, rather than detailing the internal political dynamics within Venezuela or the perspectives of regional stakeholders who might oppose external interference. By framing the issue as a binary choice between current governance and U.S.-led change, the report omits the complexities of international sanctions, humanitarian concerns, or the potential for domestic backlash against foreign involvement.