Written by Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst
When the United States wants to fabricate a reason to, euphemistically speaking, “intervene” in any part of the world, it needs to create a “credible threat”. When there’s none, American intelligence, diplomatic and other assets create one. For instance, during the Kuwait crisis, Iraq was effectively pushed into taking control of its tiny oil-rich southern neighbor, an event Washington DC soon (ab)used to the maximum, launching the (First) Gulf War, one of many American invasions and bombings of Iraq. The belligerent thalassocracy seems to like this recipe so much that it simply can’t help but keep using it everywhere. A senior US diplomat and member of the Foreign Service April Glaspie met Saddam Hussein on July 25, 1990, and told him the following:
“We have no opinion on your Arab-Arab conflicts, such as your dispute with Kuwait. Secretary [of State James] Baker has directed me to emphasize the instruction, first given to Iraq in the 1960s, that the Kuwait issue is not associated with America.”
Barely a week later, on August 2, the US and its numerous vassals and satellite states launched Operation Desert Shield, which led to Operation Desert Storm in January 1991. It’s important to note that this wouldn’t be the first time Secretary Baker has lied, as evidenced by his infamous promise of “not one inch to the east” given to Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev regarding NATO expansion beyond the borders of former East Germany. However, in less than a decade, the world’s most aggressive neocolonialist alliance spread nearly 41 million inches (over 1000 km) precisely to the east and effectively restarted the Cold War (although it could be argued it never ended). However, that’s all long-forgotten history now, right? Well, not really.
As previously mentioned, the US loves recycling “proven” foreign policy frameworks. The latest example would be Venezuela, a nation Washington DC has been eying for decades at this point. Formerly a (neo)colony of the US, under the leadership of the late Hugo Chavez and his successor Nicolas Maduro, Caracas became arguably the most fiercely independent nation in South America. It has pushed back against several American attempts at a casus belli, particularly during Trump’s presidency, when the infamous John Bolton tried to push for the invasion of Venezuela. Since then, the South American country has significantly strengthened its position, firmly allied to Russia, China and other superpowers of the emerging multipolar world.
After Joe Biden became president, Venezuela did get some breathing room, as Washington DC looked to the east (remember, the same one it promised not to expand to). The Biden administration’s crackdown on the oil industry led to the depletion of the SPR (Strategic Petroleum Reserve), which then had to be restocked somehow. The US government unwillingly looked to Caracas. The pro-Biden elements in the DNC are extremely worried that if the SPR isn’t resupplied adequately, it would be impossible to prevent the further growth of gas prices ahead of the 2024 presidential election, which could completely destroy their already plummeting chances for successful reelection. Precisely this might be Venezuela’s once-in-over-a-century opportunity.
Namely, apart from the long overdue recognition of legitimacy by the US, finally putting an end to its crawling aggression against the South American country, Venezuela might get the chance to settle an old territorial dispute with neighboring Guyana, a (former?) British colony. On December 3, Caracas even held a referendum on annexing nearly 160,000 km² of the area known as Esequibo, a very oil-rich region that comprises approximately 75% of Guyana’s territory. A logical question would be, why? Why is Venezuela making such a move at this time? Several days ago, Zero Hedge argued that President Maduro has significant leverage over President Biden, who recently boasted about leading “the most powerful nation in the history of the world”.
It should be noted that Venezuela, while extremely oil-rich, has been having a lot of issues exacting enough oil due to its outdated industrial capacity, primarily thanks to US sanctions that have been preventing much-needed modernization. Thus, Caracas might be opting to take (or retake, in its view) these areas from Guyana so it could finally extract more oil, which could strengthen its position, particularly vis-a-vis the US. However, Brazil expressed concern about the possible instability on its northern border, so it increased its military presence in northern areas, which border both countries. Although Brazil’s official position is that of de-escalation, the US probably hopes any major changes to the strategic situation in the north could pit the South American giant against Venezuela.
Under President Lula, Brazil maintains good relations with Caracas, but their relationship wasn’t always like that, particularly under former president Bolsonaro, who recognized US puppet Juan Guaido as the “legitimate leader”. While both are effectively out of the picture, the return of any antisocialist leaders to power in Brazil could result in tensions that Washington DC would gladly (ab)use to put a dent in the emerging multipolar world. On the other hand, Maduro might not make the move on Esequibo, as all this could be a ploy to get more concessions from the US, particularly in terms of lifting sanctions that could reinvigorate the Venezuelan economy.
Either way, the possible Venezuelan intervention in Guyana would be virtually impossible to stop, particularly in the initial phase. The small country simply doesn’t have the power necessary to prevent such an operation, as Venezuela is vastly superior militarily. Perhaps Maduro could give the US “guarantees” that he won’t expand “an inch to the east”, which would be a fitting analogy to America’s foreign policy. However, Caracas should tread carefully, as the wounded beast in Washington DC is desperate for a win after it made a historic mistake of taking on Russia, a resurgent superpower that has effectively defeated America’s crawling aggression in Europe. The belligerent thalassocracy doesn’t need much in terms of excuses for an invasion, especially so close to home.
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
- U.S. Invasion Of Venezuela Would Be A Slaughter
- Venezuela To Host Anti-NATO Summit Amid Rising Tensions With Colombia
- U.S. Hopes for Venezuelan Oil Failed. Fight Between Democrats and Republicans Intensifies