The U.S. Attack on Venezuela: Defining Modern Imperialism
One could define each period in history by its geopolitical conditions. By what makes each act by a state or empire possible, what conditions of the period allow monumental acts of foreign policy to be executed. Today, this period is invariably marked by the modern state, the neoliberal global economy, and the many intertwined networks which connect states, companies and individuals. In this era, the notion of modern imperialism is remarkably complicated. How would that even happen today? Would it be obvious in a world of states so connected and reliant on each other? Would we even recognise it?
On the 3rd of January, just two days ago, the U.S. launched an attack on Venezuela and captured President Maduro. In a live press conference shortly after, U.S. President Trump announced that the U.S. will “run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition” and has since allowed U.S. oil companies to move into the country to begin the process of extracting oil.
Trump has been known to prioritise U.S. private industry in much of his foreign policy agenda. The recent investment commitments negotiated with Saudi Arabia and Qatar just a few months ago exemplify this. However, these recent developments go beyond creating profitable foreign relationships. What makes the attack on Venezuela, and the almost immediate call for oil companies to move in, distinctly imperialist is the intention for U.S. control over Venezuela’s critical resources and political structure. Imperialism is defined as the use of state power to exercise control over another state by establishing economic and political dominance. By this definition, the U.S. is acting as an imperialist power in Venezuela. The motivations for such control are monumentally distinctive, characterised by their intention to forcefully implement modern global neoliberal economic systems into an existing nationalised oil industry.
According to OPEC, Venezuela has the world's largest proven oil reserves. While the U.S. once extracted some oil from Venezuela, former President Chavez forcefully renegotiated oil contracts with U.S. oil companies from 2004 to 2007. International arbitration courts ordered Venezuela to pay the companies, with much of the debt still unpaid after the oil industry was nationalised.
In contrast, the U.S. oil sector is predominantly private, dominated by companies owned by private individuals. The U.S. state engaging in the forcible control of a country with the intention of giving private U.S. companies a monopoly over its oil industry for the foreseeable future marks a monumental moment in modern global politics. It marks the intertwinement of private interests and state interests to such an extent that it would take control of another country, politically and its industry, in the service of its own dominance over the global neoliberal economy. The attack sends a message to other nations that this is the attitude of the new administration, with another three years to go – that resistance to neoliberal economic models, particularly those that favour the U.S. market, will be considered an act of antagonism towards U.S. intervention. This is the makings of modern U.S. imperialism – an imperial force defined by its insatiable hunger for global market dominance.
The action taken by the U.S. also has diverse geopolitical consequences. By effectively taking political control over the country and monopolising oil extractions in Venezuela for its own private industry, the U.S. prevents Chinese and Russian influence and extraction in the area. An extremely consequential shift for China, as it was Venezuela’s largest oil customer. What this means for their relationship with the U.S. will inevitably reveal itself soon, and a positive reaction is unlikely. In fact, China has already come out against the operation, indicating it has threatened "peace and security in Latin America and the Caribbean region". Such a negative response is also granted, given China's extensive interests in the country's resources. Venezuela holds significant mineral resources, essential for technology manufacturing, defence systems, and weapons – critical materials for modern state security for its allies. China held much of the processing capacity for these minerals for its critical systems, and the U.S. claim to “run the country” will be consequential for the future of their relationship. Venezuela’s resource richness means that the imposed U.S. control over its industries gives it forceful leverage over global manufacturing supply chains. In particular, Venezuelan oil provides the U.S. with unprecedented influence over OPEC dynamics and oil pricing mechanisms. An extremely hostile geopolitical play by the U.S., one marked with modern imperialism.
The Trump administration has defined its moment in power as one in service of a new American empire, an empire that includes private companies and their interests. Throughout history, there have been examples of state power used for private financial gain. From the Dutch East India Company to ARAMCO. What makes the attack on Venezuela unique is its explicit relationship to neoliberal economic interests, openly using state forces to extract resources for private companies to be sold in the modern neoliberal global economy. By forcibly reversing the existing state control over the world's largest oil source, the U.S. administration is punishing a nationalised industry for not integrating with the private global market to the desired extent by imposing economic restructuring. Before establishing a stable political system after removing the President, the U.S. is using military force to enforce neoliberal market logic, already allowing U.S. oil companies to begin the process of extraction in the service of economic “rationality”. This marks a significant shift in U.S. geopolitical interests as one transparently imperialist in the service of global market gains. Such gains are unique to our modern economy, one defined by its international networks. As the West's great power, what this means for global dynamics and defining the intricacies of contemporary imperialism will be historic.