Trump’s military foray into Venezuela: The U.S. Crossed Red Lines on Resource Control Policy

It's a stark reminder that global politics can be shaped by the pursuit of rare-earth resources rather than by genuine concerns for justice or democracy.

Dr. Pamelia Riviere 

As time unfolds, it will be revealed whether there was a hidden conspiracy between the world powers of Putin and Trump, aimed at dethroning Maduro to seize control of rare-earth resources and dominate the geopolitical landscape of both the Western and Eastern hemispheres. The intrigue surrounding this potential alliance could dramatically reshape the understanding of international power dynamics.

The recent U.S. military actions against Venezuela raise significant questions regarding their legal justification, as they appear to be primarily motivated by interests in oil, gold, and rare earth minerals. While much attention is often given to Venezuela's vast oil reserves, it is essential to note that the country also possesses substantial gold reserves, totalling 161 metric tons. This amount translates to approximately 5.18 million troy ounces, valued at around $22 billion at $4,300 per ounce. This positions Venezuela as the Latin American nation with the largest gold holdings. Furthermore, Venezuela is recognized for having the world's largest proven crude oil reserves, estimated at about 303 billion barrels, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. This figure represents roughly 17% of total global oil reserves, underlining the strategic significance of Venezuela's natural resources on the world stage.

America's resource control policy turns to invasion: The perspective that the United States engages militarily with oil-rich nations such as Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Iran primarily to secure their oil resources is a prevalent and complex viewpoint. Critics argue that control over these critical resources is a key motivator for U.S. interventions, particularly in the case of Iraq, where oil revenues were instrumental in funding post-war reconstruction efforts. Conversely, the U.S. government often cites humanitarian concerns—such as the need to eliminate Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) or to promote regional stability—as the official justifications for its military actions, illuminating the contrasting narratives surrounding American foreign policy objectives.

 The 2003 invasion of Iraq was officially aimed at removing the regime of Saddam Hussein, but it quickly became evident that securing oil fields was of paramount importance. Plans were put in place to utilize oil revenues to finance reconstruction initiatives, suggesting that the quest for resource control played a significant role in the decision-making process. 

It underscores the fascinating connection between America’s foreign policy and its economic motivations, revealing how deeply intertwined these two forces truly are.

 Further extending this narrative, analysts have pointed out that U.S. military interventions in Libya and Syria, like those in Iraq, appeared to serve the dual purpose of destabilizing regimes while simultaneously asserting control over their natural resources. This approach has often led to increased instability in these regions rather than to transformative development. 

Notably, during his presidency, Donald Trump openly connected the U.S. military presence in Syria to objectives related to securing oil fields, further reinforcing the notion of resource interests driving military strategy. Additionally, the U.S. has demonstrated aggressive posturing towards other resource-rich nations, such as Venezuela, underscoring the continued significance of oil and other natural resources in its foreign policy deliberations.

 The National Observer notes that these actions not only highlight strategic interests but also reflect a broader pattern of prioritizing resource control in international relations, raising questions about the implications for global stability and development.

Oil wealth of the top countries: Oil wealth accounting primarily examines proven reserves, which are the quantities of oil confirmed to be extractable, along with production levels. Countries such as Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Canada possess significant proven reserves, highlighting their potential for oil wealth. In terms of daily oil production, the United States, Saudi Arabia, and Russia are the leading producers.

Notably, nations like Saudi Arabia exhibit a high per capita value of oil wealth, even though global rankings can differ considerably. The global landscape of oil reserves and production highlights significant disparities among the top countries in both categories.

Venezuela leads the world with approximately 303 billion barrels of proven oil reserves, followed closely by Saudi Arabia with around 267 billion barrels. Iran, Canada (including its oil sands), and Iraq follow suit, holding 209, 163, and 145 billion barrels, respectively. Other notable contributors to proven reserves include the UAE at 113 billion barrels, Kuwait with 101.5 billion barrels, and Russia at 80 billion barrels, though the latter figure can vary by source. 

The United States rounds out this list with about 45 billion barrels, while Libya and Nigeria collectively have around 48.4 billion barrels. In terms of oil production, the United States dominates the market, producing approximately 21.9 million barrels per day, accounting for 22% of the global output. Saudi Arabia comes next with a production level of 11.1 million barrels per day, while Russia follows closely behind at 10.75 million barrels per day, each holding an 11% share of global production.

Other key players include Canada at 5.76 million barrels per day, China at 5.26 million, and Iraq at 4.42 million. Brazil and the UAE contribute 4.28 million and 4.16 million barrels per day, respectively, while Iran and Kuwait produce 3.99 million and 2.91 million barrels per day, respectively.

Data reflects the distribution of oil wealth across countries and the capacity of these nations to produce oil on a daily basis, illustrating the significant role that oil plays in their economies.

Trump’s military foray into Venezuela: The international community has been increasingly alarmed as reports emerge of the severe humanitarian crisis in Gaza, where many believe the United States is complicit in actions that could be classified as genocide. This concern extends beyond Gaza, as the US's involvement in geopolitical conflicts, particularly in regions like Venezuela and Iran, raises questions about the impact of its foreign policy. Critics argue that the US’s deep-state operations contribute to destabilization in these countries, exacerbating existing tensions and human rights violations. This complex interplay of military and political maneuvers has drawn scrutiny from various human rights organizations and prompted widespread calls for accountability and reform in US foreign policy. 

On Saturday, the United States executed a "large-scale strike" that ultimately led to the capture of Venezuela's president, Nicolás Maduro, along with his wife, as stated by U.S. President Donald Trump. He mentioned during a press conference late Saturday morning that the U.S. will oversee the oil-rich nation until an appropriate transition can occur. He asserted that the American presence was already established, although there were no immediate indications that the U.S. was governing the country.

BBC reported on 03 January 2026, the US has captured Venezuela's President Nicolas Maduro after a large-scale strike on the South American country, US President Donald Trump has said.

Trump said Venezuela's left-wing president and his wife were flown out of the country in a military operation in conjunction with US law enforcement. They have been charged with drug and weapons offences in New York. The Venezuelan government has since demanded proof that Maduro is alive. It has also deployed its armed forces and declared a national emergency.

Maduro's capture comes after heightened tensions between the two countries, with Washington striking boats in the Caribbean, it says, that are being used to carry drugs.The US has accused the Venezuelan president of being personally involved in drug-smuggling and being an illegitimate leader, while Maduro has accused the US of intimidation.

Al Jazeera reported on January 3, 2026, that the United States's military action against Venezuela and the alleged "capture" of President Nicolas Maduro have sparked intense reactions in Washington, DC, following months of escalating tensions between the two nations. Democratic lawmakers have primarily criticized US President Donald Trump's actions on Saturday concerning the South American nation and its leader, arguing that they breach international law and lack the necessary approval from Congress. US legislators responded to the assault on Venezuela and Maduro's supposed "capture." Donald Trump’s supporters justify the actions taken against Venezuela, while Democrats denounce the absence of Congressional oversight. A Democratic senator accused US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth of deceiving lawmakers during a Senate briefing last month when they claimed that the US pressure strategy against Venezuela was not aimed at regime change. “I didn't believe them then, and it has become clear that they lied to Congress,” Kim posted on X. “Trump disregarded the Constitution’s required approval process for military action because the Administration is aware that the American populace largely opposes the risks of dragging our country into another war.”

In a Fox interview, Trump emphasized that the United States plans to play a significant role in the Venezuelan oil industry, highlighting that Venezuela holds the largest oil reserves globally. He mentioned a military operation that involved the CIA and US Delta Force soldiers, although the number of Venezuelan casualties remains unclear. This US intervention has faced widespread criticism internationally.

The world's leaders condemned the US attack: The White House utilized controversial data related to fentanyl to support the imposition of tariffs on Canada, with President Trump even suggesting the possibility of making Canada the 51st state. In response to the kidnapping of Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro, Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney approached the situation with caution. On January 4, 2026, Carney reaffirmed Canada's stance, stating that the country supports the Venezuelan people's "right to decide and build their own future in a peaceful and democratic society." He further emphasized on social media that Canada has refused to recognize Maduro's regime since it allegedly stole the 2018 election, as CBC reported.

On January 3rd, 2026, Firstpost reported that Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro had received support from allies in the anti-U.S. camp, including Iran, China, and Russia, all of whom condemned the recent attack on Venezuela. Russia described the situation as deeply concerning, labelling the justifications for such actions as untenable and criticized the ideological hostility that has overtaken pragmatic considerations. They referred to the attack as an act of armed aggression and questioned what kind of bully targets a smaller neighbour. Similarly, China condemned the United States, characterizing the attack as hegemonic and a violation of Venezuela's sovereignty.

Notably, a special envoy from China had recently met with Maduro in Caracas, marking him as the last foreign dignitary to do so. Iran also denounced the attack, calling it a blatant infringement on Venezuela's sovereignty. In contrast, American allies, particularly in Europe, have responded with what appears to be a hypocritical stance. The European Union has consistently asserted that Maduro lacks legitimacy and has resisted a peaceful transition of power, while simultaneously claiming that international law and the UN Charter principles must be upheld. They have called for restraint in the situation, which many argue is inadequate, especially considering that a sitting president was captured in the night.

Lessons to learn: The United States has experienced military involvement in various conflicts, such as Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan, but there are concerns that it has not fully learned from these experiences. Critics often argue that American foreign policy resembles British colonial practices, with an emphasis on resource acquisition. Venezuela stands out as a significant producer and exporter of essential minerals, including bauxite, coal, gold, iron ore, and oil. The Venezuelan government controls most of the country’s extensive mineral reserves. Currently, gold has become particularly valuable and sought after. Observers are noting the extent to which former President Trump may influence oil and mineral extraction in other nations and whether his substantial investments in military initiatives and regime change will yield substantial returns or prove unproductive.

Donald Trump is focused on implementing strategies to combat inflation and prevent a potential economic depression in the United States. He advocates for taking aggressive military actions against Iran and other countries, believing that such measures, including the appropriation of their natural resources like oil, can help achieve these objectives. However, instead of pursuing foreign conflicts, Trump's efforts should be directed toward fostering domestic economic growth, promoting job creation, and ensuring stable prices for everyday consumers. Engaging in military actions abroad can divert attention and resources away from essential domestic issues, ultimately undermining the financial stability that American citizens deserve. Such reckless invasions around the world do not demonstrate that America has the strongest military; instead, immoral attacks on sovereign countries reveal America's weakness in both economic and foreign policy.

The writer is a freelance analyst.