New Delhi [India], January 4: The year 2026 began amid renewed debate over US hegemony in Latin America, as years of confrontation involving power, oil, elections, and alleged criminal activity culminated in US military action in Venezuela on January 3. The operation resulted in the capture of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores.
The US military launched a targeted mission in Venezuela, codenamed Operation Absolute Resolve, marking a significant escalation from years of economic sanctions to direct military intervention.
The Trump administration claimed that Maduro was involved in drug trafficking and had rigged the 2024 presidential election. The United States had previously imposed extensive sanctions on Venezuela and offered a USD 50 million bounty for Maduro’s arrest.
The strike has intensified questions about what lies behind Venezuela’s prolonged turmoil and why tensions have continued to escalate. While US officials frame the action in terms of security and legality, critics argue that broader strategic interests, including oil, sanctions, and global power competition, are central to the conflict.
The US operation has once again drawn attention to Venezuela’s vast oil reserves, estimated at more than 303 billion barrels, the largest proven reserves in the world. Despite this, production has fallen to around one million barrels per day due to years of sanctions, mismanagement, and underinvestment.
According to data cited by OPEC, Venezuela’s oil reserves represent roughly 17 percent of global supply, surpassing those of Saudi Arabia, which holds an estimated 267 billion barrels. Venezuela’s reserves are also more than six times larger than those of the United States. Much of the country’s untapped oil lies in the Orinoco Belt, a 21,000-square-mile region stretching across northeastern Venezuela, according to CBS News.
While oil remains a central factor in the conflict, the stated reasons and underlying motivations vary depending on perspective. US Senator Bernie Sanders criticized the intervention, writing on X that President Trump lacked constitutional authority to attack another country. Sanders argued that with many Americans facing economic hardship, the administration should focus on domestic challenges rather than what he described as illegal military adventurism aimed at benefiting major oil interests.
Trump has said the United States would temporarily “run” Venezuela and warned other countries in the region to align with Washington’s position. However, the administration has publicly justified the intervention as a matter of national security rather than a resource-driven action.
US officials have cited narco-terrorism, national security, and migration concerns as the primary reasons for the strike. Washington has accused Maduro and senior members of his government of leading a “narco-terrorist” network designed to flood the United States with cocaine. The administration has also alleged that Venezuela has become a criminal enterprise that destabilizes the Western Hemisphere by harboring terrorist groups and facilitating human trafficking.
In addition, US authorities have pointed to the mass migration of millions of Venezuelans as a border security issue for the United States.
Despite this focus on crime and security, the strategic importance of Venezuela’s oil has been openly acknowledged by US leaders. Tensions between the two countries have deep historical roots. Venezuela, under leaders such as Hugo Chávez and later Nicolás Maduro, pursued a socialist and nationalist agenda, including the nationalization of oil assets and resistance to US influence.
Chávez, who governed from 1999 until his death in 2013, championed socialist policies and state control of natural resources, positioning Venezuela as a symbol of anti-imperialist resistance. Maduro’s presidency, which began in 2013, has faced sustained opposition both domestically and internationally, particularly from the United States, which has accused his government of authoritarianism and corruption.
Western governments, led by Washington, have backed Venezuela’s opposition, fueling a prolonged and bitter political struggle. Since 2005, successive US administrations have imposed sanctions on Venezuela, including restrictions targeting the oil sector, citing alleged failures to combat drug trafficking, terrorism, and human rights abuses, CBS News reported.
Under former President Joe Biden, the United States froze the assets of Venezuela’s state-owned oil company, Petróleos de Venezuela, in 2019 and barred US entities from doing business with it. More recently, the Trump administration imposed sanctions on four companies and associated oil tankers allegedly linked to Venezuela’s oil trade.
Analysts say the US strike is unlikely to significantly affect global oil prices in the short term, given Venezuela’s limited production, which accounts for roughly one percent of global supply. Oil prices fell modestly following the operation, with West Texas crude dropping to USD 57.32 a barrel from nearly USD 80 in January.
The United States has also expanded its Strategic Petroleum Reserve and increased domestic oil production, helping cushion potential volatility in global markets.
The long-term impact will depend on political developments in Venezuela and Washington’s next steps. If US authorities allow American energy companies to re-enter Venezuela under favorable terms, production could rise over time, potentially influencing global oil markets.
In recent statements, Trump has said Venezuela “took away our oil rights” during past nationalizations and has expressed interest in restoring US corporate access to the country’s reserves. As domestic shale production in the United States approaches its peak, analysts note that access to the Orinoco Oil Belt, the world’s largest accumulation of heavy crude, could strengthen long-term US energy dominance.
The intervention is also widely viewed as an effort to reassert US influence in Latin America. Under Maduro, Venezuela developed close military and economic ties with Russia, China, and Iran, relationships Washington sees as a direct challenge to its influence in the region.
US officials have indicated that the objective of the operation was to remove Maduro and support the formation of a transitional government more aligned with US interests and open to Western investment.
Venezuela’s oil wealth has long made it a focal point of global energy politics. Before nationalization in the late 1990s and early 2000s, foreign companies such as Chevron and ExxonMobil played major roles in the country’s oil sector. US firms including Chevron, ConocoPhillips, and Exxon Mobil could return if Venezuela offers favorable conditions.
The operation aligns with Trump’s National Security Strategy, which emphasizes reasserting US influence in the Western Hemisphere and countering Chinese and Russian expansion in the region.
Russia and China have responded cautiously, with Moscow warning against military escalation and emphasizing respect for Venezuela’s sovereignty. China’s growing economic presence in South America further complicates US efforts to reshape Venezuela’s political landscape.
International reaction has been mixed, with some countries condemning the US action as a violation of sovereignty and international law, while others have expressed support. The situation in Venezuela remains uncertain, with Vice President Delcy Rodríguez claiming the presidency and vowing to resist US control. (ANI)
About The Author
