Interrupted by Matt Jones — Episode 27 with Phil Stewart

Podcast Date: January 9, 2026
Guest: Phil Stewart (National Security Reporter, Reuters)
Host: Matt Jones
Podcast: iHeartPodcasts — NewsRadio 840 WHAS

Episode Overview

In this timely episode, Matt Jones sits down with Reuters national security reporter Phil Stewart to discuss the dramatic U.S. operation to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, the subsequent political fallout, and what these events mean for both Latin America and U.S. foreign policy. Stewart brings decades of experience, reporting from over 60 countries, to provide a nuanced, fact-driven analysis of shifting power dynamics in Venezuela, the rationale behind U.S. actions, and the implications for regional stability.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Maduro’s Rule and Venezuela’s Political Climate

Background and International Perceptions

• Maduro took over from Hugo Chavez amid controversy; his election widely condemned as fraudulent by international organizations.

• Even left-leaning Latin American governments and officials labeled him a dictator ([01:44]).

• Despite significant opposition inside Venezuela, public celebrations after his arrest were nonexistent, underscoring an atmosphere of fear and repression:

  "There isn't freedom of expression, where people have fear of voicing political views that are contrarian to the government in power." — Phil Stewart ([02:59])

• Human rights organizations have criticized widespread repression, political prisoners, and lack of democratic process.

• Stewart refrains from personal opinion, emphasizing the role of international watchdogs ([04:31]).

Nature of the Government

• Stewart avoids political branding of Venezuela, sticking to Reuters’ commitment to objectivity ([05:14]).

2. Planning and Execution of the U.S. Operation

Timeline of Planning

• Reuters reported as early as November 2025 that a regime change option was being planned ([05:58]).
• Final decision to launch came only days before execution, with Christmas Day set as a fallback date ([07:17]).
• Delta Force trained on a mockup of Maduro’s residence, highlighting operational complexity and danger ([07:55]).

Details of the Operation

• Compared to and considered more complex than the Bin Laden raid, involving 150 aircraft, citywide blackout, and suppression of air defenses ([08:53]).
• Stewart reports significant casualties among Maduro’s Cuban and Venezuelan security, but no American casualties.
• Operation’s success attributed to extreme planning and innovation:

  "[...] the ability of anyone to go into a well guarded compound like that and come out, you know, with no casualties [...] is really just incredible." — Phil Stewart ([07:55])

3. American and International Reactions

U.S. Decision-Making and Risk Appetite

• President Trump viewed the operation as potentially risky, reportedly referencing fears of a "Jimmy Carter, Iran situation" ([12:10]).
• Recent high-stakes operations (e.g., Iran's nuclear bombing, Maduro’s capture) suggest a new level of risk acceptance ([12:35]).

  “We are trying to understand the risk appetite of this administration [...] the success of both those operations probably will lead the President to think this is a valid way of accomplishing foreign policy goals.” — Phil Stewart ([14:04])

Who’s Actually Running Venezuela?

• Maduro’s government remains in place but is highly responsive to Washington; the extent of U.S. influence is debated ([14:40]).
• Venezuelan authorities continue to repress opposition, arresting people for anti-Maduro social media posts ([17:20]).

Public Sentiment in Venezuela

• International observers believe many Venezuelans oppose the current regime, but fear and repression stifle visible dissent ([17:02]).

International Legality of the U.S. Operation

• U.S. DOJ personnel involved in the mission, attempting to create a legal framework by reading rights and swift processing post-capture ([20:29]).
• Global response is mixed; no consensus among Latin American nations or at the UN ([21:20]).

4. Broader Regional & Policy Implications

Threats Toward Other Countries

• Trump’s rhetoric includes Colombia and Cuba as potential future targets; creates unease among regional leaders ([22:25]).
• Stewart relays the shift in the Colombian president’s tone post direct discourse with Trump; diplomatic volatility is striking ([23:00]):

  “He used the word Bobo. He’s not dumb. [...] and then he posts something on social media afterwards where [...] a Colombian jaguar and a US Bald eagle [...] are kind of like nuzzling up together. Really? Yeah.” — Phil Stewart ([23:35])

Trump’s Volatility and Foreign Policy

• Unpredictability is seen as both a negotiating asset and a destabilizing factor.
• Stewart recounts analysis that Trump’s reputation as a wild card may prompt foreign leaders to take his threats more seriously ([25:47]).

Colombia and Cuba: U.S. Partnerships and Animosities

• U.S. and Colombia have a long-standing military alliance primarily focused on anti-narcotics.
• With Cuba, new pressure as U.S. seeks to sever Venezuelan support, deeply impacting the Cuban economy ([28:55]).

American Strategic Interests in Latin America

• The Monroe Doctrine and rollback of adversary influence (China, Russia, Iran) frame recent policy moves ([30:09]).

5. The Oil Question

State of Venezuela’s Oil Industry

• Despite boasting massive reserves, Venezuela currently produces the same amount of oil as North Dakota; years of recovery required for meaningful output ([35:40]).
• Trump administration claims of immediate oil windfall are unfounded:

  "They produce about the same amount as the US state of North Dakota." — Phil Stewart ([36:22])

Nationalization and the U.S. Oil Industry

• Nationalization during Chavez’s tenure forced U.S. companies out, but ambiguity remains over whether equipment was “taken” or merely contracts canceled ([37:12]).

Will U.S. Oil Companies Return?

• Interest is tentative; companies require guarantees and must contend with Venezuela’s heavy, less valuable crude ([38:40]).

6. The Future: Impact on Americans and Global Perception

Direct U.S. Impact and Uncertainty

• Too early to tell if intervention will lower U.S. gas prices, create a quagmire, or impact America’s global standing ([42:22]).
• Stewart cautions against easy predictions, highlighting potential for both positive outcomes (regional security, weaker adversaries) and negative fallout (costly involvement, instability).

On Greenland & Trump’s Arctic Ambitions

• The Trump administration considers “purchasing” Greenland for strategic security, but Stewart observes Denmark is a reliable NATO ally and U.S. already holds ample military presence ([44:56]).
• Potential plan to pay Greenlanders for U.S. citizenship, meets skepticism regarding feasibility and American public opinion ([47:05]).

7. The Media and Journalism Ethics

Objectivity in Reporting

• Stewart repeatedly declines to share personal opinions, embodying Reuters’ strict commitment to neutral journalism:

  “Our goal at Reuters is really to do just that, is that you should, you shouldn't know, you shouldn't have any sense of any opinion about the journalist when you're reading an article.” — Phil Stewart ([52:14])

Listener Frustration with Opinionated Media

• Jones commends Stewart’s commitment to straight news, remarking it's increasingly rare in today’s media landscape ([52:14]).

8. Personal Experiences as a War Correspondent

Most Dangerous Moments

• Reporting in Colombia’s guerrilla war zone and post-coup Venezuela brought significant personal risk ([52:53]).
• Reflections on journalism’s hazards underscore the perseverance needed for unbiased, on-the-ground reporting.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the Political Climate:
  "There isn't freedom of expression, where people have fear of voicing political views that are contrarian to the government in power."
  — Phil Stewart ([02:59])

• On the Raid:
  "The ability of anyone to go into a well guarded compound like that and come out, you know, with no casualties, is really just incredible."
  — Phil Stewart ([07:55])

• On the U.S. Policy Shift:
  “We are trying to understand the risk appetite of this administration because you’ve seen now since the summer, two major operations that are hard to imagine have happened.”
  — Phil Stewart ([12:35])

• On Oil Output:
  "They [Venezuela] produce about the same amount as the U.S. state of North Dakota."
  — Phil Stewart ([36:22])

• On Media Objectivity:
  “You shouldn't have any sense of any opinion about the journalist when you're reading an article.”
  — Phil Stewart ([52:14])

Timestamps for Major Segments

• Phil Stewart’s Intro & Maduro Background: [00:26]–[05:14]
• Operation Planning and Timeline: [05:43]–[07:55]
• Details of the Raid: [08:30]–[11:01]
• Who's Running Venezuela Now: [14:09]–[17:22]
• International Law & Reaction: [19:33]–[22:25]
• Regional Political Ramifications: [22:25]–[26:16]
• Colombia and Cuba in U.S. Crosshairs: [26:16]–[30:09]
• Oil, Nationalization & Industry Realities: [35:14]–[39:21]
• What Does This Mean for the U.S.: [42:22]–[44:25]
• Trump, Greenland, and U.S. Foreign Policy Volatility: [44:25]–[49:02]
• On Journalism & Objectivity: [50:24]–[52:40]
• Most Dangerous Reporting Moments: [52:40]–[54:49]

Episode Tone

Phil Stewart brings a steady, fact-focused, and cautious tone throughout, emphasizing regular journalistic verification, international perspectives over personal opinions, and a deep wariness of speculation. Matt Jones remains conversational and curious, seeking clarity on complex topics for a general audience and acknowledging listener anxieties and skepticism about the media.

Conclusion

This episode offers a rare, clear-eyed look at complex international events, separating fact from speculation and eschewing political grandstanding for seasoned reporting. Phil Stewart’s insights help listeners understand not just what happened in Venezuela, but why it matters — and how it fits into the broader tapestry of American foreign policy in a volatile era.