Business & Economics
U.S. Forces Remove Maduro; Trump Vows American-Led Revival of Venezuela’s Oil
In a 3–4 Jan 2026 operation, U.S. troops captured President Nicolás Maduro and Donald Trump proclaimed Washington would “run” Venezuela while American oil majors pour billions into restoring its crippled crude industry.
Focusing Facts
- Maduro and wife Cilia Flores were seized in Caracas on 3 Jan 2026 and flown to New York to face U.S. narco-terrorism charges.
- Venezuela’s Supreme Court installed Vice-President Delcy Rodríguez as interim president within 24 hours of the raid.
- Venezuela holds 303 billion barrels of proven reserves—about 17 % of global crude—but currently pumps only ~1 million b/d.
Context
Washington’s abrupt ouster of a sitting Latin American leader over oil echoes the CIA-backed 1953 coup that toppled Iran’s Mossadegh after he nationalised Anglo-Iranian assets, and recalls 2003 Iraq when WMD rhetoric masked resource aims. Over the past century, U.S. policy toward the hemisphere—rooted in the 1823 Monroe Doctrine—has oscillated between laissez-faire and direct intervention whenever energy supply or rival powers (today, China) loom large. The raid spotlights two long-running trends: the clash between resource nationalism and multinational capital, and the widening use of military force to secure supply chains amid low prices and a global surplus. On a 100-year horizon this moment may matter less for immediate oil prices than for rewriting norms about sovereignty, contract sanctity and great-power competition in the Western Hemisphere; if Washington really “runs” Venezuela, it could mark the most explicit U.S. energy protectorate since the 1914 occupation of Veracruz—and set a template, or cautionary tale, for future climate-era struggles over dwindling fossil rents.
Perspectives
Business- and market-focused media
e.g., Axios, MoneyControl — See Trump’s takeover as a potential windfall that could attract “dramatic” interest from U.S. and other non-Chinese oil firms, stressing how Gulf Coast refineries are well-suited to process Venezuelan heavy crude and framing the move as an opening for billions in corporate investment. Coverage privileges commercial upside, largely glossing over questions of legality or Venezuelan sovereignty, reflecting incentives to foreground industry opportunities and investor angles highlighted by company analysts and U.S. officials.
Mainstream wire-service and broadcast outlets
e.g., Associated Press syndications, CNN, Fox local affiliates — Portray the operation chiefly as a logistical and economic challenge, emphasizing Venezuela’s decaying infrastructure, decade-long investment needs and the limited near-term impact on global oil prices. By framing the story as a technical cost-benefit problem, these reports sidestep deeper debates about the legality of regime change and risk normalizing U.S. control as a pragmatic policy question rather than a contested act.
Progressive/anti-imperialist outlets
e.g., Consortiumnews, Alternet.org — Condemn the raid as naked U.S. imperialism aimed at ‘stealing’ Venezuela’s oil, likening it to historic regime-change wars and warning of violations of international law and corporate plunder. Intense focus on U.S. wrongdoing may underplay Venezuela’s internal governance failures and economic collapse, aligning with ideological commitments that foreground anti-war and anti-corporate narratives.