Business & Economics
US Seizes Maduro, Trump Tells American Oil Majors to Pour Billions into Venezuela
Within hours of a 3 Jan 2026 U.S. raid that captured Nicolás Maduro, President Trump declared that American oil giants must move back into Venezuela and finance a full rebuild of its crumbling petroleum sector while the U.S. keeps its oil embargo in place.
Focusing Facts
- Special Operations air-strikes hit Caracas at dawn 3 Jan 2026; Maduro and Cilia Flores were flown to New York the same day to face federal narcotics and weapons indictments.
- Trump publicly said U.S. companies would “spend billions” upfront and be reimbursed later, but confirmed that the 2019-era embargo and naval blockade on Venezuelan crude shipments remains unchanged.
- Venezuela’s Supreme Court installed Vice-President Delcy Rodríguez as acting president on 4 Jan 2026, creating a power vacuum alongside U.S. claims it will “run” the country.
Context
Washington last engineered an oil-centred regime change in 1953 Iran (Operation Ajax); the 2003 Iraq invasion and 2011 Libya intervention showed that removing a ruler is far easier than stitching a viable petro-state afterward. Trump’s gambit reprises a century-long tug-of-war between resource nationalism and external corporate control: Venezuela nationalized in 1976, Chávez re-asserted control in 2007, and now the pendulum swings back under U.S. guns. Long-term, the move tests two structural trends: declining Western appetite for ground occupations, and intensifying U.S.–China rivalry over energy access—China currently buys much of Venezuela’s covert crude. If U.S. firms can restore output (300 bn-barrel reserves) before the global transition away from oil accelerates, it could reshape supply for a decade; if not, it risks joining the list of costly, destabilizing interventions that, on a 100-year arc, only deepen skepticism about great-power control of sovereign resources.
Perspectives
Pro-Trump or conservative-leaning outlets
e.g., DT News — Celebrate the U.S. strike as a swift victory that will let American oil giants move into Venezuela and revive its industry, benefiting both countries. Echo Trump’s talking points while sidestepping questions about sovereignty, civilian costs or the legality of a foreign military takeover.
Left-leaning media
e.g., The Guardian, HuffPost — Cast the operation as a blatant oil grab, stressing that Trump is prioritising corporate profits and ignoring legal and ethical concerns. Focus on presumed ulterior motives and past hypocrisies, which may overshadow practical energy or governance considerations.
Business-oriented U.S. outlets
e.g., POLITICO, The Wall Street Journal — Treat the episode chiefly as a commercial puzzle, noting vast reserves but warning that huge investment, political stability and clear policy are prerequisites before firms commit. Market-centric framing downplays humanitarian fallout and frames Venezuelan sovereignty mainly as a factor in investment risk.