Throughout history, the United States has frequently intervened militarily to secure and protect its oil interests. What makes Saturday morning’s capture of Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro different is that, this time, the stated motive was clear.
In 1953, after Iran’s Prime Minister, Mosaddegh, nationalized Anglo-Iranian oil interests, the U.S. and UK initiated Operation Ajax in order to oust him from power and regain control of the oil. It wasn’t until August 2013 that the CIA officially admitted to its role in the coup, but even then, it never directly referenced the oil.
In 2003, the U.S. justified its invasion of Iraq with the claim that Saddam Hussein’s regime had Weapons of Mass Destruction, a claim that later proved to be false. Several senior figures, from U.S. Fed Chair Alan Greenspan to former CENTCOM Commander Gen. John Abizaid, later admitted oil was a central strategic factor.
Further interventions in Syria, Libya, and Kuwait, to name but a few, followed a similar pattern, with oil reserves and security always an unspoken but fundamental aspect of U.S. national security.
This time around, there is no hiding behind humanitarian or ideological reasoning; President Trump has made his motives abundantly clear. Upon implementing a blockade on the country, he demanded that Venezuela “return to the United States of America all of the Oil, Land, and other Assets that they previously stole from us”. While he didn’t expand on exactly which oil, land, and assets had been stolen, it is likely the 2007 expropriation of U.S. oil assets by then-President Hugo Chávez.
Since the capture of Maduro, it has been notable that Trump has not pushed for the overthrow of Maduro’s successor and has specifically played down the possibility of opposition leader Maria Machado rising to power.
Instead, the U.S. President has threatened boots on the ground if the acting President Delcy Rodríguez doesn’t go along with U.S. plans for the country. Those plans, according to Trump, are to have U.S. oil companies “go in, spend billions of dollars, fix the badly broken infrastructure, the oil infrastructure, and start making money for the country.”
So far, the response from Delcy has been clear, stating that Venezuela “will never again be a colony of anyone – not of old empires, nor of new empires, nor of empires in decline”.
Reviving Venezuela’s oil industry will require tens of billions of dollars and years of work, not to mention the legal and political hurdles that are associated with Saturday’s action. Oil majors will require long-term guarantees before they commit to significant engagement in the country, and ultimately, that means stability.
The transactional nature of President Trump makes the current situation in Venezuela clearer than several previous attempts by U.S. administrations to secure oil resources. For Trump, the success or failure of Saturday morning's unprecedented attack can be clearly measured against his demands.
For the region, this attack appears to be the beginning of a broader strategic development. Already, Trump is pushing the term ‘Donroe Doctrine’, alluding to the Monroe Doctrine in which the U.S. considered the Western Hemisphere its ‘sphere of influence’. The President has since suggested Cuba, Mexico, and Colombia could all face a similar action.
As for the influence of this attack on the broader international order, it is likely to play out over a much larger timescale and with the potential for far graver consequences
By Josh Owens for Oilprice.com
