War against Venezuela

The US aggression against Venezuela, under the Monroe Doctrine and Trump administration, marks a neocolonial shift on the continent, where the removal of a sovereign president reveals the imperial willingness to forcibly reshape hemispheric geopolitics.

"A hundred warns, one punishes. A word to the wise is sufficient." (Portuguese folk proverb).

1.

From January 2026 onwards, there will be a before and after. We are facing a shift in the world situation. Donald Trump didn't even ask the US Congress for authorization for military intervention in Venezuela. The operation involving bombings and the kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady and Congresswoman Cilia Flores is, strictly speaking, illegal, if the US Constitution is considered.

This is a one-sided attack, based on untenable pretexts such as the accusation of an alleged... Cartel of the Suns...to justify the state terrorism of the world's greatest power. The kidnapping and criminalization of Nicolás Maduro as a drug trafficker is an infamous maneuver to disguise a war that began with the military siege of the country's territorial waters, the sinking of dozens of boats with over a hundred dead, the capture of three oil tankers, and culminated with the commando operation during the bombing of Caracas. It was not formally declared a war, an atrocious hypocrisy. But the publicly admitted plan is the domination of the country; therefore, it is a war.

The stated objective of the offensive is to reduce Venezuela to the status of a protectorate. The US does not recognize the country's sovereignty and wants to use its power to decide who should govern. It was an unprecedented imperialist action in Latin America since 1989, when Panama was invaded and Manuel Noriega was imprisoned during George Bush's presidency. The military "extraction" of Nicolás Maduro, a euphemism for the kidnapping of the president of an independent country, was only the first attack.

The danger of further interventions is real and imminent. The strategy involves new bombings to force the overthrow of the government by force, if Delcy Rodrigues does not surrender. Donald Trump has already declared his willingness to even occupy the country, imposing a puppet government, which is part of a recolonization plan through the appropriation of oil reserves by American companies, among other reasons, to exclude China from access.

Washington's military superiority, confirmed in Caracas, was a brutal show of force against Moscow and, above all, Beijing: from the bombings in Iran, through the weapons delivered from Ukraine to Volodymyr Zelensky to Benjamin Netanyahu's Israel, imperialism Yankee He wanted to prove that he is the only power capable of exercising power on a global scale.

2.

Venezuela was the first country to be attacked for three equally serious reasons: (a) because it has varied and immense natural resources that are of crucial importance, not least the most accessible oil in the face of the immeasurable demand placed by new artificial intelligence infrastructures; (b) because it was the nation that went furthest in South America in asserting an independent state since the Cuban revolution, in a sensitive geopolitical position; (c) because it was the weakest link in Latin America, due to internal social and political fractures and international isolation, dependent on relations with China, Russia, and Iran.

Washington's narrative is absurd. It's not true that Venezuela is a narco-state. The supply routes for the drug market don't originate in Venezuela; they use the Pacific Ocean. It's not true that this is an invasion in defense of democracy. Trump maintains close relations with monstrous tyrannies like Saudi Arabia. Who could even consider that a puppet government imposed by Donald Trump would be more legitimate? All the pretexts are, absurdly, dishonest, false, and fraudulent.

The aggression is not only an unspeakable political crime, but also confirmation that Washington has decided to make crystal clear its intention to use force when it deems appropriate, threatening Colombia and Cuba even if there is perhaps no real and immediate danger of something on the scale of what happened in Caracas, and making it clear that this is the beginning of a long-term offensive on a continental scale.

It would be unforgivable not to conclude that any Latin American government that opposes US interests is threatened by the willingness to impose control over what Washington considers its right of dominion in the Western Hemisphere, the American continent, including Greenland, from Alaska to Tierra del Fuego in Patagonia. The new US national security doctrine, the Donroe, Monroe + Trump doctrine, makes this new priority explicit.

Washington's repositioning responds to the need to regain economic and political dominance in the face of China's growing economic presence. In this reorientation, the decisive country is Brazil.

 American supremacy is no longer what it was thirty years ago, given China's rise to power. But it is necessary to calibrate the analysis of this trend with rigorous realism. Any underestimation of US power in the world will have devastating, if not irreversible, consequences for a long period. The outcome of the anti-imperialist struggle in solidarity with Venezuela will depend, first and foremost, on the fighting capacity of the Venezuelan people, but the role of international solidarity is also key, beginning with the irreplaceable role of resistance within the US.

3.

Latin American neofascism will align itself with Donald Trump. Brazil is not immune to the outcome of this struggle. State terrorism is a very powerful weapon of intimidation. Fear is a very powerful feeling. Those who may not have raised a red flag after the interference in the Argentine elections, when Donald Trump openly and explicitly blackmailed Javier Milei, should now raise a red flag. In Colombia in May and in Brazil in October, attempts to manipulate the election results will not shy away from the most sordid tactics, on social media, but not only there.

The Lula government doesn't need to agree with Nicolás Maduro to recognize that he is a political prisoner and demand his freedom. No one needs to be a Chavista to defend Venezuela's sovereignty. Those who don't do so on the Brazilian left plunge into dishonor, shame, and infamy.

The context is one of a new, dramatically dangerous situation. The regime and the government remain in power in Venezuela, albeit weakened. Defeats are defeats; they leave wounds, shake morale, and it is important to learn the lessons. But losing a battle does not mean losing the war. The war has only just begun. The decisive struggles are ahead of us; they are not behind us. Fatalism is a bad advisor.

Defeatism is complicity with demoralization. It is not only weapons that decide wars, but the strength of mobilization fueled by anti-imperialist consciousness. Those who disregard the fact that the Venezuelan regime has an internal social and political base are mistaken. It is true that material living conditions have deteriorated, even dramatically, due to decades of imperialist siege, and that there is understandable exhaustion among the masses from the sacrifices in the struggle for survival.

It is also true that there were corruption processes, to varying degrees, within the upper echelons of Chavismo, some of which were publicly exposed, such as the illicit enrichment of two presidents of... PDVSARafael Ramírez (2004–2014) and Talik El Aissami (2020–2023). But it wasn't because Venezuela failed to advance in an anti-capitalist rupture that imperialism attacked it, but rather because it advanced more than any other Latin American country in the struggle for independence. The devaluation of the significance of the struggle for national liberation in a dependent, semi-colonial nation, even if atypical due to its oil wealth, is a serious programmatic error.

4.

In this context, the conspiracy theories that have emerged in the social media environment, including within the sphere of influence of the left, are false and harmful. Why was the US aggression so successful? For three fundamental reasons: the enormous technological and military superiority of the US, the element of surprise, but also, to some degree, betrayal. The cyberattack neutralized the anti-aircraft defenses, and the commando operation had a great deal of information about Fort Tiúna.

Clearly, there was CIA infiltration on the ground, and there are always traitors recruited for money. US espionage networks are present throughout the world, including in Brazil. But the imaginary "cabals," paranoid thinking incompatible with Marxism, which argue that military intervention could only be so successful if it had high-level complicity within the government, if not the entire government, are false.

Clearly, much remains to be learned about the collapse of the Venezuelan defense in the early hours of January 3rd. But while conspiracy theories may be fascinating, they are also the prelude to demoralization.

What will Donald Trump's line be? No one can know for now. It will likely be a continuation of "terminal" threats, such as the insinuation that Delcy Rodrigues could face a worse fate than Nicolás Maduro, and therefore be sentenced to death, alternating with suggestions of negotiation. But on what terms? The conditions remain unclear.

Economic strangulation is powerful, but will it be enough? Washington has already surprised a Venezuelan bourgeois faction abroad – mostly in Florida or Madrid – by summarily dismissing any leading role for María Corina Machado, acknowledging that she lacks internal support. With no internal bourgeois opposition possessing even a minimum of social and political respect, and a shameful admission that Nicolás Maduro did not lose the 2024 elections, Donald Trump's strategy seems to be to fuel internal division within the regime.

Chavismo has always been more of a political-military movement than a party, much less a monolithic one. But a simple, unconditional surrender of the Venezuelan government would be an unthinkable demoralization. Excluding a negotiated transition, the alternative for Donald Trump would be the use of force. The US navy has until the Northern Hemisphere summer to remain on standby in the Caribbean, the start of hurricane season. An "apocalyptic" military solution does not seem possible.

A full-scale invasion cannot be ruled out, but it seems unlikely for two reasons: (i) the disastrous outcome of the withdrawal from Iraq and, above all, Afghanistan; (ii) unlike a commando operation, it would require tens of thousands of soldiers in a large country with inhospitable terrain, such as the Andes Mountains and the Amazon rainforest, where military resistance can be sustained indefinitely. In other words, the cost would be so high that, even in the event of a military victory, it would be a Pyrrhic one.

5.

What are the options for Caracas? The government reacted to the attack by seeking internal cohesion around the appointment of Delcy Rodrigues as acting president without recognizing a vacancy in the office. The key issue in this legal-political formula is not calling elections. A preventive and prudent decision in the face of the possibility of Donald Trump shifting to an immediate election campaign.

Venezuela has an interest in buying time. Elections with the nation surrounded by the world's largest war machine cannot be free elections. The Delcy Rodrigues government is not wrong in declaring that it remains open to negotiations and, indeed, that it is willing to seek agreements regarding the Yankee presence in oil production. No one with a modicum of common sense precipitates a war that cannot be won except at a devastating cost.

Economic concessions are plausible in the face of the danger of an invasion that would destroy the country. Venezuela's fate depends on the social strength of internal mobilization and the solidarity of international mobilization against Trump. Within this framework, it is more than legitimate to undertake all possible maneuvers to buy time and politically contest the consciousness of the masses, both inside and outside the country, for the sake of justice and the cause of sovereignty and freedom for Nicolás Maduro.

What will be the role of China and Russia? The reaction of Beijing and Moscow remains unclear, but neither Xi Jinping nor Putin will consider direct military intervention, even a purely deterrent one, because it could trigger a Third World War. But it's never all or nothing in class struggle or in the struggle between states. There are many mediating factors.

China and Russia should do much more than simply issue a statement of solidarity. Venezuela is surrounded and urgently needs economic and political support. There are many initiatives that would be justified. An international meeting of all countries that condemn the US intervention would signal that the Delcy Rodrigues government is not abandoned to its own fate.

The articulation of the defense of Venezuela's sovereignty will take place in distinct "circles" of alliances, from the broadest to the most restricted. The banner of "No to war" and "Respect for the sovereignty of Caracas" will be the minimum program. But, on another level of solidarity, it will also be necessary to defend the freedom of Nicolás Maduro and Cilia Flores. On yet another level, economic support for the Delcy Rodríguez government.

Brazil's responsibility in this context is immense. The immediate integration of Venezuela into BRICS would be very positive. A visit by Lula to Caracas would be a courageous gesture of solidarity.