Venezuela may seem like a geographically distant country, but it is a critical laboratory for understanding the imperialist interventions and global power balances of the 21st century. The intervention launched by the US in the first days of the year should be read as a natural consequence of long-standing economic, military and diplomatic pressures.
This aggression, touted in official discourse as an operation against drug cartels, is in essence a reflection of the desire for hegemonic control over oil, gas and rare minerals. This intervention is not only directed against a country's domestic politics; it is part of a strategy of hegemony that extends from the Atlantic to the Pacific, from Greenland to Latin American markets, making the importance of regional solidarity more visible than ever.
The Trump administration's security strategy makes clear the US regional hegemonic ambitions. The intervention in Venezuela, following Nicolás Maduro's meeting with Chinese leader Xi, is a blow to the publicist and independentist streak in Latin America, as well as a move against China's economic and political influence on the continent.
Since the US cannot afford a direct confrontation, it proceeds through fragile spaces and applies a sophisticated model that goes beyond the classical forms of occupation of modern imperialism. Through legal tutelage, economic sanctions and the symbolic use of international institutions, sovereignties are emptied and power relations are no longer determined by tanks and guns, but by economic and political manipulation.
In Venezuela, the forcible takeover of the head of state amounts to a symbolic evacuation of the de facto sovereignty of the country. International legal texts and the presence of the United Nations are no substitute for de facto control. Maduro's personal fate represents the price for a public, independent and populist line in Latin America: The message is clear, “Adapt or be liquidated.” This is a political warning sent not only to Venezuela, but to a vast geography, from Brazil to Argentina, from Africa to Asia. The modern form of de facto occupation targets political memory, makes an example of leaders and removes symbolic elements of national sovereignty.
The Trumpist US foreign policy puts liberal rhetoric into practice without the need for a veil. The rhetoric of democracy, human rights and multilateralism has taken a back seat to the goals of energy security and regional hegemony. Venezuela has been chosen as a “convenient dossier” for this strategy: rich natural resources, economic weakness and international isolation show that for the US, interests and hegemonic goals, not claims of freedom, are decisive. The order established in Venezuela today reveals the norms of modern imperialism, combining economic and political tutelage with the symbolic functionality of international institutions.
The reactions in Latin America reveal the inadequacy of regional solidarity. Brazil has preferred cautious silence, Colombia has adopted a role of compliance and subcontracting, while countries like Mexico, Argentina and Chile have chosen to follow the process with a discourse of “neutrality”. This picture shows that small and medium-sized states are left alone against imperial interventions in a multipolar world and that the absence of regional solidarity weakens the defense of sovereignty. The normalization of what happened to Venezuela will lead to the retreat of publicist and independent lines in Latin America and drag the region into a long period of silence.
The intervention in Venezuela also reveals the tension between principled stance and pragmatic interest. While Cuba reacts ideologically, Russia and China monitor the process with limited interventions in diplomatic and legal frameworks, avoiding a de facto confrontation. North Korea's support is symbolic. This picture clearly demonstrates that the multipolar world discourse is not enough to protect small and medium-sized countries in times of crisis. It shows that the international balance of power is determined not only by military capacity but also by economic pressure and diplomatic manipulation.
The US aggressive policies are a test for the world working class and oppressed peoples. These interventions threaten not only Venezuela, but all independent and publicist lines. It is an imperative of global popular solidarity and political will to roll back the aggressor. For workers and laborers in Turkey, it is critical for both national and global solidarity that governments do not provide logistical or political support to the US. This is not only a Venezuelan issue, but also a test of universal resistance and solidarity.
Venezuela is not an exception; it is a warning. The new forms of modern imperialism are sophisticated mechanisms that go beyond the classical methods of occupation and empty sovereignties through legal and economic means. What is happening today is a laboratory for the world of tomorrow. It is both an ethical and political imperative for oppressed peoples and working classes to develop a common strategy, to take this warning seriously and to take a collective stance against the new forms of imperialism.
Barbarism is not temporary; history has shown this time and time again. Only resistance and solidarity can make it possible for oppressed peoples to win. Venezuela demonstrates this truth in all its nakedness: in every corner of the world, peoples standing up to imperialism not only defend their own territory, but also a global line of freedom and justice.
The voice raised in Venezuela today is a warning for the struggle for equality and justice in tomorrow's world, and those who do not hear this warning will find themselves unprepared for the dark scenes of the future.