Trump’s attack on Venezuela: Drugs and oil – A Commentary

Dieser Artikel ist auch in deutscher Sprache verfügbar: Zum deutschen Artikel.

Is it actually difficult to classify the US attack on Venezuela? At least Chancellor Friedrich Merz claims this. The current discussion in Germany is, to put it mildly, very strange, ranging from “Finally, dictator Maduro is gone!” to “The US attack on Venezuela, which violates international law, must have consequences!” But does anyone, both in the US and in Venezuela, really care?

Voices from Germany

Chancellor Friedrich Merz is being rather evasive, one could say even chickening out, when he says: “The legal classification of the US intervention is complex. We are taking our time with this. As a matter of principle, the principles of international law must apply in relations between states.” This is more than contradictory. Regardless of the reasons, when one state attacks another, it is not covered by international law. But let’s give him time and wait to see what statement of his will follow.

Michael Weickert, CDU faction leader in the Leipzig City Council, even welcomes the intervention. On LinkedIn, he writes: “It’s a good day for Venezuela. After almost 30 years, the socialist dictatorship has been ended by American intervention.” At the end of the post, he writes: “Venezuela now has the opportunity to take responsibility for its own path to democracy. Despite the circumstances, which can be criticized, this is a good day for freedom and democracy in this world.”

The “circumstances” are a violation of international law, and “ownership” is the US president’s stated intention to rule Venezuela indefinitely. But enough about that, what are the media and people in the US saying?

Voices from the US

Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene said on X:

The New York Times reported on January 3 in an article titled “In Toppling Maduro, Trump Risks Blowback from ‘America First’ Base” that Trump has alienated his MAGA supporters.

“Mr. Trump, who has pledged to cease ‘endless wars’ and reduce the number of American troops overseas, left open the prospect of deployment to Venezuela—something that he has spoken of only vaguely in the past. Speaking to reporters, he said the United States was ‘not afraid of boots on the ground,’ adding that the administration planned to have a military presence in the nation ‘as it pertains to oil.’”

As Greene already pointed out on X, it is clear that this is neither about overthrowing a dictator nor fighting drug trafficking, but about OIL.

This is even more evident in an article published by POLITICO on January 3. The article, titled “Trump admin sends tough private message to oil companies on Venezuela,” begins with “American oil companies have long hoped to recover the assets that Venezuela’s authoritarian regime ripped from them decades ago.”

Here, too, the framing of the ‘surprising and unpredictable’ intervention of the US in Venezuela is reduced to absurdity. “Administration officials have told oil executives in recent weeks that if they want compensation for their rigs, pipelines and other seized property, then they must be prepared to go back into Venezuela now and invest heavily in reviving its shattered petroleum industry, two people familiar with the administration’s outreach told POLITICO on Saturday. The outlook for Venezuela’s shattered oil infrastructure is one of the major questions following the U.S. military action that captured leader Nicolás Maduro.”

So perhaps politicians in Congress and the Senate were not informed about Trump’s plans, but the oil companies were. This can also be concluded from this statement: “In preparation for regime change, there had been engagement. But it’s been sporadic and relatively flatly received by the industry, It feels very much a shoot-ready-aim exercise.”

Donald Trump confirmed this himself in a televised address, at least this is what can be concluded from it. “We’re going to rebuild the oil infrastructure, which will cost billions of dollars. It’ll be paid for by the oil companies directly. They will be reimbursed for what they’re doing. But that’s going to be paid and we’re going to get the oil flowing the way it should be is, you know, it was just a minor flow—was actually a minor flow for what they had. But we’re going to run it properly. We’re going to make sure the people of Venezuela are taken care of.”

Conclusion: Even though some people in Germany talk about Venezuela’s “liberation” from a dictatorship, it is about oil and not freedom. Maduro’s dictatorship is being replaced by a dictatorship of Trump and the oil companies. It is to be feared that the attack on Venezuela will serve as justification for further “regime change”, as Marjorie Taylor Greene fears. In other words: the 1960s to 1980s are back.