Are native Venezuelans happy with the current state of the country?

1. Celebration abroad, ambivalence at home

Large crowds of Venezuelan migrants and expatriates celebrated Nicolas Maduro’s capture in cities from Miami to Madrid, with diaspora communities describing relief that Maduro—who presided over a mass exodus—was removed, but even those rejoicing expressed doubts about what comes next ^{[1] [2]}. At the same time, Venezuelans inside the country voiced mixed feelings: some grateful for the removal of Maduro yet anxious that his capture does not automatically deliver better lives, while pro-Maduro supporters rallied passionately demanding his release ^{[3] [7]}.

2. Fear of foreign control and worries about deportations

Many Venezuelans, particularly in U.S. diaspora communities, worry that U.S. control or overt influence could translate into accelerated deportations, or a transition that privileges foreign interests over Venezuelan self-determination, a concern voiced by residents in Doral and observers of U.S. policy rhetoric ^{[2] [8]}. Analysts and policy scholars have flagged the centrality of oil revenues to Venezuela’s sovereignty and warned that if external actors seize or control those funds, political independence would be hollowed out and public sentiment could sour quickly ^{[5] [6]}.

3. Legal and diplomatic unease shapes public sentiment

The U.N. and many diplomats publicly questioned the legality and broader stability implications of the U.S. operation that led to Maduro’s capture, with Secretary‑General António Guterres and the U.N. Security Council urging respect for sovereignty and inclusive dialogue—messages that amplify Venezuelan anxieties about legitimacy and the rule of law ^{[4] [9]}. Venezuela’s U.N. ambassador condemned the operation as “an illegitimate armed attack,” and government institutions inside the country sought to project continuity by installing Delcy Rodríguez as acting president, actions that have further split public perceptions of whether the country is being run freely ^{[9] [10] [7]}.

4. Hope tempered by uncertainty and risk of instability

Experts and think tanks stress that Maduro’s removal may be a tactical success but not a guarantee of long‑term strategic gains for Venezuelans, warning of fragile transitions, possible infighting over amnesties and oil control, and an unstable caretaker period—all scenarios that feed Venezuelans’ mixed emotions of hope and apprehension ^{[6] [11]}. Media reporting from Caracas and other cities records citizens expressing gratitude that Maduro is gone while simultaneously fearing violence, economic dislocation, or a replacement regime that fails to improve daily life, so widespread happiness is far from assured ^{[3] [7]}.

5. Polarization: a country split along political and geographic lines

The picture in 2026 is of a deeply polarized population: jubilant expatriates and opposition backers on one side, pro‑Maduro protesters and nationalists on the other, and a large middle of Venezuelans who are cautiously optimistic but unsettled about foreign intervention and the practical outcomes for services, security and migration ^{[1] [2] [3]}. International statements from the EU calling for respect for the Venezuelan people’s will and regional concerns about external intervention underscore that many Venezuelans’ moods will continue to depend on whether transitions are seen as homegrown or imposed ^[12].

Conclusion

In short, native Venezuelans are not broadly happy with the current state of the country; responses are fragmented—elation and relief in parts of the diaspora, anger and solidarity among regime loyalists, and pervasive uncertainty among those still living in Venezuela—while global legal and political disputes over U.S. actions, control of oil revenues, and the legitimacy of transitional arrangements mean that any durable improvement in popular sentiment will depend on who governs, who controls resources, and whether Venezuelans themselves perceive the outcome as legitimate ^{[1] [3] [5] [6]}.