Trump reveals the real reasons behind the war on Venezuela
Sunday 21 December 2025, by Luís Bonilla-Molina
Venezuela and its people are the first direct victims of the "Trump Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine." This war, which has already been declared, is not against drug trafficking or the Maduro regime, but rather for oil and rare earth minerals, military bases, information, and misgovernment. All democratic, progressive, popular, and leftist forces must denounce and confront the US offensive against Venezuela, which in no way means defending the Maduro government.
"America First" is the expression that sums up the neo-fascist and neo-colonial attitude of present-day US imperialism. Trump’s declaration on Tuesday, December 16, 2025, is a radical deepening of the imperialist offensive against Venezuela. It no longer wants to "go after drug cartels" or bring about a simple regime change, but demands absolute US control of Venezuelan oil, demanding the "return of territories" – which is nothing more than changing the condition of dependence to a neocolonial territorial relationship. The US is threatening to annex part or all of Venezuelan territory, something unprecedented and of dramatic significance.
In November 2025, the Trump administration published a document entitled National Security Strategy, in which it defined its priorities, emphases, purposes, and course of action. Reviving and relaunching the Monroe Doctrine, this document is a roadmap for the political moment of building a global capitalist reordering, in which the United States needs to consolidate its power.
The new world order that is struggling to emerge is incredibly capitalist and militaristic, and the United States aspires not only to be part of it, but to remain the hegemonic nation. In this realignment, control of energy and inputs for innovation (oil, uranium, lithium, rare earths) play a central role.
The Trump administration has clearly defined its territorial priorities in what it calls the Western Hemisphere, a kind of expanded border that includes all of Latin America and the Caribbean, Canada, and Greenland. In this scenario, Venezuela acquires strategic value due to its mineral wealth—the largest oil reserves, potential for rare earths in the southern/Orinoco region, biodiversity, water, and genetic reserves—as well as its privileged military location in northern South America, south of the Caribbean with a coastline on the Atlantic, and a few kilometers from the Panama Canal, which allows it access to the Pacific. The United States does not want to share these privileges with China, Russia, or any emerging nation. In other words, Venezuela is a target for the Americans, as stated in the Trump Doctrine. This is an unprecedented violation of territorial and political sovereignty.
To achieve this, since August 2025, the most impressive military and troop deployment known in the region for decades has been generated. The attack on fishing boats, accused of being drug mules, has been the tragic melody of the presentation of its offensive against Venezuela, which is intensifying every day. The intervention in Venezuelan airspace, with a NOTAM issued by the US air traffic authority and Trump’s direct presidential order to ban flights to the country, was escalated with the maritime piracy of the capture and confiscation of an oil tanker. On December 16, Donald Trump himself declared that he demands Venezuela "return oil, land, and other assets to the United States." In other words, he has publicly declared his decision to seize oil reserves and his desire to directly colonize part of Venezuelan territory.
This can only be achieved through direct military occupation of the territory, establishing military bases. But he wants to do so at the lowest possible cost in terms of the loss of American soldiers’ lives, operational expenses, and political impact. Therefore, the decision to confiscate all oil tankers not authorized by the US Treasury Department is another escalation to suffocate Maduro’s government and create the conditions for its downfall, either through internal implosion, a coup d’état from within Maduro’s own camp to initiate a transition agreed upon in the terms of the National Security Strategy. Or as a result of a "surgical operation" that would allow the Edmundo González Urrutia-María Corina Machado duo to take power. The economic suffocation of the country seems to be the ideal tool to bring any of these colonial initiatives to fruition. We would be talking about the risk of unprecedented famine for the Venezuelan population.
The establishment of US military bases on Venezuelan territory would allow the US to establish a colonial relationship close to oil reserves, ensuring exclusive access to them. In a country like Venezuela, where even its historical ally Rómulo Betancourt did not accept the establishment of US military bases on its territory due to the effects that Venezuelan nationalism would have on the electoral will of the people, this can only be achieved through a long and chaotic transition—one that prolongs and, incredible as it may seem, tes the misery and tragedy of the material living conditions experienced by the population during the Maduro period, something that is becoming increasingly clear in the US offensive.
The immediate collateral damage is being felt in Cuba, which is unable to receive Venezuelan aid in the form of fuel and oil for its economy and the maintenance of its electrical system. The United States is betting on a domino effect in the region, which will produce the "carom" of displacing the governments of Caracas, Havana, and Managua in one fell swoop. In other words, the positioning is for total control of the so-called Western Hemisphere.
Additionally, using the latest technological advances in data capture and processing, the United States is moving forward with the implementation of a predictive control regime by having extremely valuable information on the behavior of the population (of the Western Hemisphere in general and Venezuela in particular) in response to its military deployment in the southern Caribbean. That is why it generates rumors and counter-information on social media every day, to elicit responses from the population, which it can then segment and classify in order to construct its scenarios for action.
We are experiencing the first regional military offensive with technology, techniques, and purposes typical of the fourth industrial revolution, which makes it extremely difficult to interpret using the paradigmatic keys of the first three industrial revolutions.
The impossible transition
María Corina Machado has undisputed leadership among the Venezuelan population, even in sectors that historically supported Chavismo. This is largely due to Maduro, who, in his eagerness to polarize in order to prevent the consolidation of a left-wing opposition, has played the game that suits MCM best. But socially rooted leadership is not the same as the ability to govern, especially if the diagnosis of the Venezuelan crisis and the path to overcoming it is wrong.
MCM’s bet is on promoting an illiberal government that will continue and deepen the neoliberal policies applied by Maduro, especially those implemented since 2018. Its strategy of absolute liberalization of the market economy as a formula for generating employment turns its back on the central problem facing Venezuelans in the short term: wages and the return of minimally decent material living conditions. The "post-Maduro bonanza" of an economy without sanctions is seen by MCM in terms of privatization , labor flexibility, and attracting international capital, which is only possible by keeping wages low.
The United States knows this, which is why its commitment to a transition via González-Machado is to pave the way for a long and chaotic transition that will allow it to establish its openly colonial relationship with Venezuelan territory and wealth. In fact, MCM has repeatedly stated that the "recovery of Venezuela" will require deeper levels of cooperation with the United States.
The miscalculations of Madurismo
Maduroism’s anti-imperialism is limited by its survival in power. Maduroism is not leftist, much less revolutionary. Since the war in Ukraine, it has sought a strategic agreement with the United States, trading oil in exchange for remaining in power. The problem is that now the Trump administration wants to go much further.
Maduro’s government has been a disaster for the Venezuelan people and working class. Not only in terms of wages and material living conditions, but also in terms of restrictions on basic democratic freedoms, such as the right to express opinions, freedom of expression, the possibility of organizing autonomously in unions and political parties, territorial roots, and comprehensive human development. Maduro has been a terminator of the advances made during the Chavista period and a deepener of its mistakes. No Venezuelan alive has known a worse government than Maduro’s.
Amid these conditions of imperialist offensive, Maduro continues with his authoritarian line of action and the survival of the new bourgeoisie he represents. An imperialist offensive such as the one unleashed since August 2025 in the southern Caribbean can only be confronted with a large national anti-imperialist front resulting from a minimum nationalist consensus, but this requires reversing his own policies, freeing political prisoners — who include social, progressive, and leftist leaders — a general amnesty for all those prosecuted, imprisoned, and subject to restrictive measures, the return of political parties to their legitimate members, and a reorientation of dwindling national revenues toward wages and salaries.
But Maduro has done the opposite, deepening repression, increasing the number of detainees and those prosecuted, deepening the fall in wages and the concentration of wealth in a few hands. He does the opposite of what logic demands, because his commitment is not to the people but to sustaining a model of accumulation that favors the rich.
Maduro’s rhetoric does not correspond to what is happening socially. For ordinary citizens, the US attack is fundamentally against Maduro, and there is no reason to defend him. Given this situation, the desperation to survive has led large sections of the population to believe that Maduro’s departure, by any means, would be the beginning of a recovery from the oppressive situation in which they live. For the general population, the US National Security Strategy is of little importance, because Maduro has destroyed their hope for a better tomorrow.
This is a complex situation for nationalist and progressive forces and those who have not renounced their leftist identity, refusing to place themselves under the leadership of EGU-MCM. What is significant is that the country is currently experiencing, from the world of labor and the working class, initiatives for depolarization based on the construction of a minimum program for the defense of wages and basic democratic freedoms. The question is whether there will be enough time to build an autonomous pole for another possible transition.
What should be done?
Continue to bet on (and work for) the constitution of an autonomous political pole of workers, unreservedly supporting initiatives such as the formation on December 12 of the Unitary Agreement of six trade union centers, federations, guilds, and unions for the rescue of wages. An event like this, amid military tensions in the Caribbean, speaks to the instinct of the working class in the face of any scenario in the short and medium term.
In addition, the campaign for a General Amnesty must be intensified, to free all those detained, prosecuted, and subjected to restrictive measures, paving the way for multiple voices to come together to reflect on national sovereignty in times of imperialist attack. Demand the return of parties, unions, and union federations to their legitimate representations.
Any differences with Maduro, political parties, or personalities cannot serve as an excuse for not developing authentic anti-imperialism, based on the interests of the working class. All democratic, progressive, popular, and leftist forces must denounce and confront the US offensive against Venezuela, which in no way means defending the Maduro government. The departure of Madurismo must be a decision and process of the Venezuelan people, led by its working class. In this sense, these are days of promoting an anti-imperialist policy without hesitation or doubt.
Whether facing Maduro, EGU-MCM, or any other government, the working class must defend its autonomy and reaffirm that only its capacity for struggle will allow it to emerge from the current crisis. We revolutionaries must humbly and decisively contribute to this cause and direction.
16 December 2025
Attached documentstrump-reveals-the-real-reasons-behind-the-war-on-venezuela_a9321.pdf (PDF - 919.2 KiB)
Extraction PDF [->article9321]
Luís Bonilla-Molina is a Venezuelan university lecturer, critical pedagogue and president of the Venezuelan Society of Comparative Education.
International Viewpoint is published under the responsibility of the Bureau of the Fourth International. Signed articles do not necessarily reflect editorial policy. Articles can be reprinted with acknowledgement, and a live link if possible.
The Problem with Machado: Assange Sues the Nobel Foundation
The Swedish police have promised it will go nowhere, but the attempt by WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to draw attention to the inappropriateness of María Corina Machado as a Nobel Peace Prize recipient raises a few salient matters. On December 17, Assange submitted a criminal complaint to the Swedish Economic Crime Authority and the Swedish Crimes Unit. The legal complaint is directed against the Nobel Foundation, arguing that the pending transfer of 11 million SEK ($US 1.18 million) and the award of the prize medal to Machado violate the terms of Alfred Nobel’s will of November 27, 1895.
The will, binding under the terms of Swedish law, stipulates that the award of the prize and monies be given to a person who, during the preceding year, “conferred the greatest benefit to humankind” in pursuing “the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.”
Given that the peace prize laureates are selected by the Norwegian Nobel Committee, seeking to hold them accountable for their poor choice of awardee might have been a better starting point. But the complaint is alert to this, noting that the Swedish funds administrators have a fiduciary duty to disburse the funds. “The Norwegian committee’s selection does not grant them criminal immunity.” Indeed, it was up to the administrators to consider such a decision made “in flagrant conflict with the explicit purpose of the will, or where there is evidence that the awardee will use or is using the prize to promote or facilitate the crime of aggression, crimes against humanity, or war crimes”.
Whatever the administrative minutiae, Assange’s effort is worth noting. Machado has become the unsavoury alternative to the Venezuelan incumbent, Nicolás Maduro, a figure who refused to accept the electoral returns for his opposing number, Edmundo González, in July 2024. González was essentially a pick by Machado, who has emerged as the empurpled, plumed candidate seeking Maduro’s overthrow. That she was the 2025 choice of prize recipient was galling enough for 21 Norwegian peace organisations to boycott the ceremony and prompt Nobel Peace Prize laureate Adolfo Pérez Esquivel to remark that, “Giving the prize to someone who calls for foreign invasion is a mockery of Alfred Nobel’s will.”
Machado has made no secret of her approval of the buildup of US military personnel (around 15,000) off the coast of Venezuela since August, including a nuclear-powered attack submarine and the world’s largest aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald R. Ford. She has “incited and defended the Trump administration’s use of lethal military force and preparation for war.” The US military has already committed, charges Assange, “undeniable war crimes, including the lethal targeting of civilian boats and survivors at sea, which has killed at least 95 people.” (President Donald Trump has liberally designated such individuals as narco-terrorists.) The Central Intelligence Agency has been authorised to conduct covert actions in Venezuela. Parts of the Venezuelan military have been classified by the Trump administration as a Foreign Terrorist Organisation (FTO).
Since Assange submitted his complaint, Trump has ordered a complete blockade of sanctioned oil tankers entering or exiting Venezuela. The US has thus far seized two tankers, though the authorities have failed to distinguish which tankers are sanctioned or otherwise. The Panama-flagged Centuries, for instance, was not officially sanctioned by the US, showing that this administration is not one to be, as US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth put it, legally tepid.
A list of incitements to war by Machado is enumerated. They include the dedication of the award to President Trump for having “Venezuela in where it should be, in terms of a priority for United States national security”; a heartfelt endorsement of US military escalation as maybe being “the only way” in dealing with Maduro; warm appreciation for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s “decisions and resolute actions in the course of the [Gaza] war” and the endorsement of extrajudicial killing of civilian boats in the Caribbean Sea as “visionary”. Hardly the résumé for a peacemaker.
Assange argues that the failure of the funds administrators to stop pertinent disbursements to Machado, in light of the material submitted in the complaint, “indicates ongoing criminal intent”. Such funds aided “a conspiracy to murder civilians”, violated national sovereignty through using military force, and advanced resource theft (Machado’s promised reward to US firms of oil and gas resources amounting to US$1.7 trillion). In doing so, Nobel’s will and charitable purpose had been violated through “gross misappropriation, aiding international crimes […] and conspiracy.” They also breached Sweden’s obligations under the Rome Statute. By way of remedy, the “immediate freezing of all remaining funds and a full criminal investigation lest the Nobel Peace Prize be permanently converted from an instrument of peace into an instrument of war” was sought.
In an email to AFP, Swedish detective inspector Rikard Ekman showed little interest in taking up the matter. “As I have decided not to initiate a preliminary investigation, no investigation will be conducted on the basis of the complaint.”
While this complaint remains a purist’s attempt to return the peace prize to a more conventional reading (Assange thinks the UN Secretary General António Guterres and UN human rights chief Volker Turk are eminently more suitable candidates), the practice of awarding this inflated award to figures of ill repute and sullied reputation will be hard to shake. The ghost of former US security advisor and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, a man lauded for bringing peace to Indochina when he covertly indulged illegal bombing campaigns, not to mention war crimes, torture, and an assortment of other blood sports, continues to loom large. It might well be time to abolish the Nobel Peace Prize altogether, and the committee responsible for it. It was never a strong indicator of merit, even if it offers the chance for some very dark humour for the reptiles to revel in.
No comments:
Post a Comment