Elias Jabbour: "The world is no longer the same after Maduro's kidnapping."

247 - The escalation of international tensions triggered by the kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro by agents linked to the United States government has opened a new stage in the global geopolitical dispute and placed Latin America back at the center of Washington's strategy. In an interview with Brazil 247, the professor and researcher Elias jabbour He stated that the episode symbolizes a "strategic retreat" by the US in the face of its inability to compete globally with China and Russia, and warned that the world is going through a profound historical rupture. "The world today is not the same as it was 50 years ago.", he said. The conversation was broadcast on TV 247, on the program hosted by Leonardo Attuch e Andreia Trus.

Jabbour analyzed the episode as a landmark of unprecedented aggressiveness in the form—though not in the content—of US foreign policy. For him, the kidnapping of a head of state exposes the end of the rhetorical veneer that, for decades, sustained interventions under the guise of democracy and human rights. "The historic novelty is tearing away any veil of hypocrisy surrounding democracy, human rights, etc. That's over.", he said.

The “Trump corollary” and the attempt to restore spheres of influence.

Throughout the interview, Jabbour described what he called "Trump corollary" This is a foreign policy based on attempting to reassert control over spheres of influence, with Latin America once again being treated as a priority zone. According to him, Washington realizes it has lost its capacity for global competition—especially with China—and is trying to compensate for this by reclaiming the hemisphere as a natural space for domination.

"The United States realizes that it is no longer able to compete globally with China and Russia itself.""In the professor's view, Maduro's kidnapping became the first major testing ground for this doctrine, but not necessarily a guaranteed success," he assessed.

"The 'regime change' cycle has not been completed."

One of the central points of Jabbour's analysis is that the operation in Venezuela could turn into a political quagmire, precisely because what he calls the closing of the cycle of regime change.

"The cycle of regime change has not ended. The American military intervention was not followed by widespread popular demonstrations to overthrow the PSUV."He said, recalling that the Venezuelan vice president took office reaffirming sovereignty and denouncing the kidnapping.

And he concluded with a direct warning: "If they fail to completely change the regime in Venezuela, the Trump corollary begins in Venezuela and ends in Venezuela.".

At the same time, Jabbour considered that underestimating the US would be a mistake: "I'm not trying to underestimate American power, quite the opposite. Whoever did this didn't get away with it."Nevertheless, he insisted that the global landscape has changed radically, and the US no longer operates under the same conditions as in the 1980s.

Latin America facing a new barbarity.

When questioned about the regional consequences, Jabbour stated that Latin America could once again experience an environment of political barbarity similar to that of the 1980s, now with new tools and an even more explicit discourse of domination.

"The United States will try to occupy Latin America, preventing countries like Iran, China, and Russia from accessing natural resources and assets in the region.", he stated. For him, the ultimate goal would be to structure governments that have been converted into "protectorates", used to legitimize the plunder of strategic resources.

Jabbour also warned of the structural nature of this movement, which seeks to prevent any regional autonomy in crucial sectors such as energy, critical minerals, water, and oil.

Brazil: "It's either us or them"

The interviewee was even more emphatic when commenting on the risks for Brazil. He cited statements from governors and far-right leaders who, according to him, applauded Maduro's kidnapping and adhered to the logic of submission to the foreign policy of the United States.

"This makes it very clear to the Brazilian people that if the far right returns to power in Brazil in 2026, they will be nothing more than puppets of US foreign policy.""he said.

In the same speech, Jabbour stated that a possible return of this political field would mean... delivery of strategic assets...such as water, oil, and critical minerals. He also recalled that Jair Bolsonaro even proposed the joint exploration of the Amazon with the US, citing this as an example of what he calls a sell-out agenda.

For him, the kidnapping in Venezuela also creates a "political asset" for popular and nationalist forces in Brazil. "It's either us or them.", summarized.

China and Latin America: trade, investment, and the impossibility of substitution.

Analyzing the impact of Trump's stance on economic relations, Jabbour stated that China's influence in Latin America cannot be reversed by decree or intimidation, because the US does not have the capacity to offer what the Chinese provide in terms of trade and investment.

"The United States is not capable of delivering to Latin America the goods that China delivers: manufactured goods, machinery, electronic equipment.", he said. And he added: "There's no way a decree or a simple military occupation can change that.".

Nevertheless, Jabbour considered that Venezuela, while relevant, is not central to China's energy strategy. "Venezuela accounts for only 4% of the oil that China imports from the world."He stated that China could withstand localized losses, although it is moving politically to raise the diplomatic tone.

According to him, the Chinese reaction is beginning to change as it realizes that the US has failed to overthrow the Venezuelan regime: "China is raising the tone at the UN and in all international organizations."He said, linking this movement to the perception that the Washington operation was not completed.

BRICS: financial focus, not military focus.

Asked about the possibility of the BRICS transforming into a military bloc, Jabbour dismissed this hypothesis in the short term. He explained that the group still acts as a political and financial arrangement seeking consensus—especially in the dispute over a new international financial architecture—with a focus on payment mechanisms and integration.

"The BRICS today are a political arrangement between countries with shared worldviews."He stated, pointing to the BRICS Bank as the main institutional framework.

For him, the real strategic step — before any military agenda — would be for the Global South to unify as a large regional market and build its own systems of investment, trade, and financing, albeit at a slow pace.

Lula's government and the narrow options: sovereignty and reindustrialization.

Commenting on the Brazilian government's position, Jabbour praised the official statements and documents that condemned the violation of international law in the Venezuelan case. He stated that Brazil has acted correctly so far, but warned that national options are dwindling.

"The world is no longer the same as it was a week ago. Everything changed after this attack on Venezuela and the kidnapping of Maduro."He stated, emphasizing that Brazil must navigate 2026 with a clear political focus: sovereignty.

In the professor's view, the focus of the electoral debate needs to be the defense of national independence, without the need for immediate gestures such as formal adherence to the Belt and Road Initiative, but with a strategic focus on strengthening the country internally.

And he presented the point he considers decisive: reindustrialization.

"There's no way out for Brazil anymore. We need to go through a process of reindustrialization. This needs to happen yesterday.""He said. Jabbour stressed that Brazil is vulnerable because it lacks a defense industry and is suffering from accelerated deindustrialization, even with policies like the New Industry Brazil program."

He criticized the low investment rate and pointed out that deindustrialization increases ideological and political vulnerability. "With deindustrialization, the financial system and agribusiness, two classes that couldn't care less about Brazil's future, come to dominate the country.", he said.

In the most symbolic passage, he argued that the left should assume the historical role that should belong to a non-existent national bourgeoisie: "Since we don't have a bourgeoisie that thinks about Brazil as a nation, let the left take on that role.".

2026 Elections and Hybrid Warfare: Big Tech and an Offensive on Subjectivity

Asked about the impact of the Venezuelan episode on the 2026 Brazilian election, Jabbour stated that Trump is likely to focus heavily on Brazil and that the political contest will be marked by the intensification of hybrid warfare and the use of digital platforms, which are still unregulated.

"Brazilian networks are not regulated. They will operate an attempt to subvert the subjectivity of the Brazilian people in order to elect a far-right government.", he said.

According to him, the difference compared to the past is that the far right now acts openly as an external agent, which could become a mobilizing factor for the national movement. "They're not hiding it, they're speaking openly about it.", said.

The nuclear debate is back on the agenda.

At the end of the interview, Jabbour commented on the discussion about strategic deterrence and nuclear weapons, stating that Brazil does not yet have the accumulated national awareness to resume a nuclear program with real political force. Even so, he argued that the topic should be placed in the public debate as a strategic necessity.

"We put on the agenda the need for Brazil to resume its nuclear program and make this common sense."He stated, citing North Korea as an example of a country that faced extreme hardship to gain deterrent capability and ensure autonomy.