Former CIA covert operations officer Mike Baker told Newsmax on Thursday (16th) that while the authorization of CIA activities in Venezuela does not necessarily signal that military action is imminent, it does signify a significant escalation in U.S. involvement against the Maduro regime.

Baker appeared on "National Report" to discuss a report released Wednesday confirming that President Donald Trump had authorized the CIA to conduct lethal operations within Venezuela.

“The authorization we are talking about... covers a broad spectrum here,” Baker said. “However, it could simply mean access to intelligence, such as on-the-ground information gathering. Just because one might bluntly say, 'Okay, this is what they are going to do now,' it doesn’t mean they are suddenly deploying ground troops.”

Baker stated that this move represents preparation for potential future actions rather than a green light for lethal strikes.

“They are laying the groundwork for potential operations that could assist in this overall effort,” he said. “I don't think anyone should take this too seriously in terms of what it means in the short term.”

Nevertheless, he added, “That said, there is a $50 million bounty on the head of anyone providing information leading to the arrest of Nicolás Maduro. That is already a decided matter at this point. I know the administration has pushed back, saying, ‘We are not discussing regime change here.’”

Baker added that the U.S. has long "avoided" the issues of drug trafficking and governance in Latin American countries like Venezuela, Ecuador, and Honduras, noting that such authorizations often reflect the blurred lines between drug enforcement and covert political operations.

“Whether it’s Venezuela, Ecuador, or Honduras—both past and present—and the relationship between Honduras and the drug trade, we have always avoided this issue of the war on drugs,” Baker said. “And we have done various things.”

Baker told Newsmax that the key issue lies in maintaining a legal and transparent framework for covert, physical actions, such as sinking drug-smuggling vessels.

“It’s fine as long as there is a solid legal basis. I don't see any problem with airstrikes,” he said. “Again, I would like to see a bit more transparency regarding the intelligence on individual targets. I think that can be done without revealing sources or methods.”

He added that transparency could help the White House deflect political criticism, emphasizing the irony of the Democratic Party suddenly finding itself defending a drug-related regime.

“It would prevent the White House from being constantly criticized by Democrats saying, ‘I can’t believe you’re doing this,’” Baker said. “Although, it is interesting and quite amusing that the Democratic Party has put itself in a position to defend drug traffickers.”

U.S. NNP = Representative Reporter Sung Ku Hong / Special Correspondent for NNP info@newsandpost.com