Before World War II, the United States’ (US) primary threat perception was largely directed toward European states, but after the war, this perception shifted to revolve around the Soviet Union. Since the early 2000s, the discourse of “global counterterrorism” has come to the fore in American foreign policy. Organizations such as Al-Qaeda and ISIS/ISIL have been defined by the US as the primary threats in this context. Along with the rise of these organizations, the US has increased its military interventions around the world. In other words, the terrorist acts of these organizations have provided legitimacy for US occupations in the Middle East. This situation shows that the actions of terrorist organizations coincide with US interests.
Venezuela, which ranks first in terms of global oil reserves, also possesses significant natural resource wealth, particularly in critical minerals such as gold. The United States has wanted to gain sole control over these resources. In this context, the United States resorted to methods incompatible with democratic and legal norms and abducted Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. The US has used the threat of drug cartels from Venezuela to the US as an excuse to justify this abduction. This stance by the US is similar to the pretext of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq prior to the invasion of Iraq.
Historically, energy resources have played a central role in determining global power balances. The 18th and 19th centuries were dominated by coal, the 20th century by oil, and the first quarter of the 21st century by natural gas. Since the first quarter of the 21st century, the strategic importance of rare earth elements has begun to increase. In other words, the 21st century will be the century of rare earth elements. In this context, it is expected that oil’s decisive role in the global system will weaken and continue to weaken.
China is the global leader in rare earth elements, which are critical for electric vehicles and renewable energy technologies. As of 2024, China alone produced approximately 270,000 tons (69%) of the approximately 390,000 tons of rare earth elements produced worldwide. In other words, China controls about 85% of the rare earth elements processed globally. Furthermore, facilities processing critical minerals in China operate at about 50% lower costs compared to other countries. China is about ten years ahead of its competitors in this field.
Critical minerals are heavily used in electric vehicles, particularly in renewable energy technologies, and this advantage has also been reflected in China’s automotive sector. Of the 50 automobile companies with the highest market value globally, 17 are based in China, 8 in Japan, 6 in the US, 5 in India, 4 in Germany, 2 in South Korea, 2 in Turkey, 1 in France, 1 in Sweden, and 1 in the Netherlands. In summary, Germany, once the world leader in car production, has lost this title to China. The economic downturns in Europe, particularly in Germany, have also deeply affected the US economy. The US is no longer as economically powerful as it once was. For example, while the US accounted for approximately half of the world’s total economic output in the 1950s, this figure has now fallen to around 25%.
During Donald Trump’s second term as president, the US withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement and adopted an energy policy that prioritized fossil fuel production and distanced itself from renewable energy sources. The Trump administration aims to break the decisive role of OPEC and OPEC+ countries in the oil markets and gain a more dominant position in the global energy order through prices. However, it remains unclear what tools will be used to achieve this goal and to what extent. Behind Trump’s move to abduct Venezuelan President Maduro from his country lies a power struggle over energy resources.
There is significant uncertainty surrounding how the US can profit from Venezuela’s oil revenues and how these revenues will maintain the dollar’s strength as a reserve currency. Increasing US energy supply (when Venezuela produces a lot of oil) causes oil prices to fall, which particularly benefits energy importers such as China, India, and Turkey. Conversely, restricting US supply increases the economic gains of producer countries such as Russia, which benefit from high oil prices.
The shale gas revolution that took place in the United States in the 2010s elevated the country from an energy importer to an exporter. This has made US energy policies an important element of its global hegemony strategy. Latin America has long been a region of strategic priority in US foreign policy, defined as its “backyard.” In this context, the US seeks to maintain its global hegemony by first controlling its immediate surroundings.
The US’s oil move against Venezuela is directly related not only to energy security but also to the process of de-dollarization. The Trump administration has stated that Venezuelan oil will be extracted and processed by US companies and exported to global markets. However, concrete and technical mechanisms for the feasibility of this goal have yet to be clarified. Countries within BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) are seeking alternatives to the dollar-centered global financial system. In other words, formations such as BRICS and the SCO, referred to as the Global South, are challenging the dollar hegemony of the US.
Russia and China’s long-standing influence over Venezuela has weakened with Maduro’s abduction, and this sphere of influence has shifted in favor of the US. According to experts, “Venezuela’s oil is technically difficult and costly to extract.” In this context, China, which has relatively stronger economic capacity, has been unable to achieve high-volume oil production in Venezuela for many years. Conversely, it is highly uncertain how the economically weakening US will extract these resources and whether it will be able to ensure sustainable profitability.
In the debate over priorities between military power and financial power from the US perspective, maintaining the dollar’s status as the global reserve currency is a fundamental priority. Indeed, after World War II, the US established an international system built on dollar hegemony. In this regard, the export of a significant portion of Venezuelan oil to China via cryptocurrencies and/or the Chinese yuan is an indirect threat to dollar hegemony. The US’s attempt to take over the Venezuelan government is aimed at securing control in its own backyard, but it is also a reflection of its efforts to increase the power of the dollar as a global reserve currency through Venezuela’s energy reserves. In this context, possible US military or political interventions in South America may not completely halt the US’s loss of global power, but they may serve to delay it to some extent.
Venezuela’s oil infrastructure is largely outdated and worn out. Therefore, high investments are needed to sustainably increase production. However, it seems difficult to implement these investments in the short term. In the coming years, global economic downturn trends are expected to increase. The share of renewable energy sources and nuclear energy in the energy portfolio is rapidly increasing. In light of these developments, it is predicted that the price of oil will hover around $50 per barrel in the coming years. As the process of deindustrialization deepens in Europe, if China is unable to sell its goods on global markets, the economic stagnation worldwide may become more pronounced. If oil prices remain low, American energy companies may not be very eager to extract oil in Venezuela. In this situation, the US may not be able to prevent de-dollarization.
There is a clear division in US domestic politics regarding energy policies. Democrats take a more distant stance towards fossil fuels, prioritizing renewable energy sources. Republicans, on the other hand, pursue policies that support fossil fuel production. Donald Trump withdrew the US from the Paris Climate Agreement at the beginning of his second term, clearly demonstrating his pro-fossil fuel stance. For this reason, the pro-fossil fuel Trump sees his future largely in Venezuelan oil.
Following the 2026 Congressional elections in the US, it is highly likely that the Republican Party will lose its majority in Congress. This situation will significantly limit Trump’s legislative support during his second term. In short, Trump will become a “lame duck” in the US. In this context, it seems highly unlikely that oil revenues from Venezuela will make a significant and decisive contribution to the US economy during Trump’s presidency.
If widespread “anti-US” resistance emerges in all Latin American countries, particularly Venezuela, the US will shift a significant portion of its military forces deployed in different regions globally to South America. However, it should not be forgotten that Venezuela is not limited to the Maduro administration. The neutralization of Maduro by the US does not mean that the Venezuelan government is completely under control. Latin American countries facing major economic crises, hunger, and security issues may experience serious internal turmoil and uprisings in the coming years.
The United States has not brought peace and prosperity to any of the countries it has occupied, particularly Afghanistan and Iraq. In other words, spring has not come to any place the US has gone. The military hierarchy in Venezuela has a very extensive network. The presence of over two thousand generals in the country is the result of a political arrangement that prioritized regime security during the Hugo Chávez era, rather than a military structure based on merit. Therefore, in terms of governance, Venezuela is prone to great instability and internal turmoil. In the coming years, the US will focus more on South America and direct a significant portion of its military, political, and economic energy to this region. The US’s global power will weaken further as it expends its energy here.
