The abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro by the Trump administration in order to “make the oil flow” is akin to a thief stealing outdated VCRs: it is taking a huge risk for an item whose value is diminishing. In this case, the obsolete technology is oil, and the risk is borne not by the thief but by the Venezuelan people, American taxpayers, and the global climate.
Hours after Maduro’s abduction on January 3rd, President Trump declared in a press conference that “major U.S. oil companies” would invest billions to rebuild Venezuela’s oil industry. Having vehemently fought accountability for its role in climate change, the oil and gas industry may believe it will enjoy protection and impunity by aligning more closely with our authoritarian president.
However, this attack, deemed illegal by experts according to national and international law, endangers people in the U.S. and worldwide, clearly benefiting only one industry. The expansion of oil and gas infrastructure, along with increased exploitation of Venezuela’s resources, will exacerbate political, economic, and environmental risks of a fossil fuel-focused energy system.
And it is likely that only Trump’s closest allies will become enriched.
This latest U.S. aggression in Latin America is another manifestation of the deep ties the Trump administration has with big oil companies and its blatant prioritization of private profits and corporate interests over the public good. It is a toxic and dangerous combination: an administration that disregards legal obligations and a president who believes himself above the law, attacking another country in the name of an industry that has operated with near impunity and actively lobbies to evade responsibility for the harm it causes.
The administration’s plans for Venezuela’s future remain concerning, albeit vague: the president confirmed that the U.S. could stay in Venezuela “for years.” Despite skepticism expressed by ExxonMobil’s CEO and other oil executives after a recent meeting with the president, it is unclear what role Congress intends to play in the debate over war powers resolution in the Senate.
### U.S. Imperialism, Venezuela’s History, and the “Donroe” Doctrine
Venezuela boasts the world’s largest proven oil reserves, but only extracts a small percentage of that oil. Many U.S.-based oil companies operated in Venezuela, but relations with the government soured after its leaders nationalized the national oil company in 1976. When former President Hugo Chávez further nationalized the oil and gas industry in 2007, ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips rejected the new terms and had their assets expropriated. Both companies filed lawsuits against Venezuela in international courts, eventually receiving billions in compensation that Venezuela has not paid.
The U.S. imposed sanctions on Venezuela related to drug trafficking in 2005, but the Trump administration expanded these sanctions to the financial sector. Today, Chevron is the only U.S. oil company operating in Venezuela under a sanctions exemption granted by the U.S. Treasury Department. Several Chinese, Russian, Italian, and Spanish companies also have a presence in Venezuela.
The sanctions exacerbated pressure on Venezuela’s economy, preventing the country from maintaining its oil infrastructure and significantly reducing exports. President Trump claims that U.S. companies’ technical expertise and investment can rebuild that infrastructure and tap into the oil wealth, a claim experts disagree with.
The operation in Venezuela is a classic example of imperialism, where countries with larger armies take control of smaller countries under the pretext of national security to control their natural resources. Many studies show that the benefits of extractivism rarely reach the population of the country where the resources are located.
Despite President Trump’s rhetoric, it is unlikely that the Venezuelan people, who are currently suffering, will benefit if U.S. intervention leads to increased oil and gas extraction in the country.
According to former fossil fuel company CEO and current Energy Secretary, Chris Wright, the U.S. intends to sell Venezuelan oil “indefinitely,” with the revenues being deposited in accounts controlled by the U.S. government but later “returned to Venezuela to benefit the Venezuelan people.” Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut commented that it is a “crazy plan” to indefinitely steal Venezuelan oil at gunpoint and exploit it to rule the country.
The incursion into Venezuela could be the first of several attempts to take control of South American countries under the reimagined “Donroe Doctrine” by President Trump, aiming to give the U.S. control of over 40% of the world’s oil and the ability to control commodity prices.
ExxonMobil and other U.S. companies are reaping substantial income from oil production in Guyana, Venezuela’s neighboring country. Venezuela and Guyana have long been embroiled in a territorial dispute over their oil-rich border region, with reports of Venezuelan military vessels threatening ExxonMobil’s oil tankers.
The Venezuelan oil is also one of the most carbon-intensive in the world, which would be devastating for the climate if its production were increased.
President Trump has threatened Colombia, Cuba, and Mexico. It is worth noting that this U.S. military incursion occurred just months before the start of the First International Conference on a Just Transition Away from Fossil Fuels in Colombia, announced after more than 80 countries called for a roadmap to phase out fossil fuels during the COP30 international climate talks held last year in Brazil. President Trump’s illegal actions demonstrate the urgent need for a just and rapid phase-out of fossil fuels for security in the Americas and worldwide.
### Big Oil Benefits and Schmoozes
President Trump has devoted a significant portion of his agenda to suppressing renewable energies in the U.S. and globally, while inflating the fossil fuel market. The cancellation of offshore wind projects before their launch, the termination of tax incentives for electric vehicles, the opening of federal lands for drilling, and withdrawing the U.S. from international climate organizations—all these actions aim to return to a time when clean energy did not exist, despite the rapidly worsening climate crisis.
President Trump changed the national and international policy of the U.S. with the expectation of support from the most powerful industry in the country. His alleged meetings with industry leaders during the campaign to request a billion dollars in contributions, as well as record donations from the industry, reveal the close relationship between that industry and the Trump administration’s policies, regardless of their public attempts to maintain distance. (ExxonMobil has long claimed its independence while benefiting greatly from its influence over U.S. politicians and policies.
Their former CEO, Lee Raymond, couldn’t have made it clearer: “I’m not a U.S. company and I don’t make decisions based on what’s good for the U.S.”). However, it is reported that some industry leaders were consulted before Congress regarding the U.S. military incursion in Venezuela, and high executives met with the president last Friday.
It’s costly to extract and process Venezuela’s heavy crude, so U.S. oil companies may take some time to see substantial profits. Venezuelan oil is also one of the most carbon-intensive globally, meaning it would be devastating for the climate if its production were increased.
Chevron might be better positioned to capitalize on the situation and continue operating with impunity, as it did in the Ecuadorian Amazon, while ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips could file their multimillion-dollar claims against the Venezuelan government. And if they decide to return to the country, the U.S. military could provide security at the expense of American taxpayers.
Marathon, ExxonMobil, and Citgo own some of the most significant refineries on the Gulf Coast that can refine Venezuelan oil. But while U.S. refineries hope to benefit from Venezuela’s heavy crude, health and environmental damages would worsen in the Gulf Coast communities of Louisiana and Texas, which already suffer from environmental racism.
Moreover, billionaire Paul Singer, founder of Elliott Investment and Trump supporter, acquired Citgo a few days before the invasion, raising questions about insider trading.
President Trump and his corrupt network are trying to consolidate their political power before the midterm elections. This illegal show of force complements the intensification of attacks against U.S. civil society, fossil fuel industry lobbying for immunity from climate accountability, and efforts to persuade the Supreme Court to reject climate liability lawsuits.
As the Trump administration withdraws the U.S. from the primary international treaty to combat climate change and the most reliable source of climate science, it relies on misinformation tactics used by the fossil fuel industry and seeks to undermine the solid attribution science underpinning environmental responsibility claims.
### Oil Appropriation as a Typical Authoritarian Measure
Evidence worldwide unfortunately shows that authoritarianism serves the interests of the oil and gas industry more than democracy. Additionally, the harms caused by the fossil fuel industry disproportionately affect historically marginalized individuals, especially in the Global South.
Transnational oil and gas companies, their subsidiaries, joint ventures, and business partners often establish good relations with military regimes and rely on local political factions or mercenaries for protection, often resulting in terrible human rights and environmental abuses.
The actions and plans of the Trump administration go against the advisory opinions on climate change issued last year by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and the International Court of Justice, which made clear that climate inaction is a violation of international law, recognized climate change as a human rights issue, and clarified nations’ obligation to regulate fossil fuel companies under their jurisdiction.
By disregarding international law and constitutional limits in its attack on Venezuela, the Trump administration is not only escalating geopolitical risk but also making Venezuela a less viable environment for responsible investment and long-term business operations. Military actions without a clear legal basis undermine predictability, treaty stability, and the rule of law guarantees on which companies rely when making multimillion-dollar decisions on infrastructure, financing, and insurance. Instead of “opening” Venezuela to investment, this approach creates volatility, legal uncertainty, and reputational risks for companies.
### A Lost Bet for Big Oil
Despite its best efforts, President Trump cannot halt the transition to clean energy. Global leaders and markets know that renewable energy is more economical, healthier, more accessible, and more reliable than fossil fuels.
Global oil supply is projected to exceed demand by over 2 million barrels per day in 2026, and oil prices are currently at their lowest level in four years. That means investments in Venezuela would not be immediately profitable to keep prices low, as President Trump would like to placate consumers, especially with the political uncertainty that exists.
But finances are not the only reason why the Trump administration’s radical stance on oil is a lost bet. The production and continued use of fossil fuels threaten our climate, public health, and human rights. The burning of fossil fuels is the leading cause of global warming, which costs our country billions of dollars each year, despite this administration’s attempts to bury climate science. In addition, concerns about the incursion in Venezuela perfectly illustrate how an energy system based on fossil fuels exacerbates economic, social, and political inequalities.
President Trump’s addiction to fossil fuels will not make Americans safer or wealthier. In fact, it will do the opposite: drag us into a 19th-century imperialist adventure that imposes high costs on all inhabitants of the planet. This illegal and imperialist appropriation of oil is another reason why we all must rise up in peaceful, sustained public protest and turn to civil resistance.
This is a translation of the article published in English on January 13th.
