President Trump’s reluctance to hand power over to the Venezuelan opposition is, to some extent, justified, given that it largely stems from the old, corrupt elites. (…) At the same time, there are well-founded hopes that the humanitarian crisis in the country will come to an end and that Venezuela will recover economically,” assesses Dr. hab. Dominik Smyrgała.
The daring operation by U.S. special forces, which ended with the capture and removal of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro from the country, likely marks a significant reconfiguration of the balance of power in Latin America. It also offers Venezuelan society a chance to emerge from humanitarian catastrophe and, in the longer term, to rebuild its former prosperity.
Executioner and Victim: Che Guevara
Behind the catchy slogan of the Bolivarian Revolution—referring to the legacy of Venezuela’s most important national hero, the famed “Liberator” Simón Bolívar, and used interchangeably with the term “21st-century socialism”—lay a concept of a complete restructuring of social relations in Venezuela and, ultimately, across Latin America. Its symbol was President Hugo Chávez, the leader of a failed coup attempt in 1992 who, after serving a prison sentence and with the support of Fidel Castro, was elected president in 1998 through a fully legal democratic process. Chávez, who styled himself “El Comandante,” often appeared at public rallies dressed in the manner of Ernesto “Che” Guevara or in his own trademark outfit consisting of a red shirt and a paratroopers’ beret. His charisma was undeniable.
Moreover, it must be honestly acknowledged that the political forces governing before him had created fertile ground for revolutionary rhetoric. Enormous revenues from oil exports were a source of prosperity for a narrow elite, while the majority of the population lived in poverty. Economic growth based on “black gold,” which had propelled Venezuela into the top ten richest countries in the world in the 1970s, collapsed after oil prices fell in the mid-1980s. Social inequalities deepened to almost feudal levels. In this context, the social program of the Fifth Republic Movement founded by Chávez is difficult to assess through the traditional lens of left- or right-wing politics—after all, in Europe, maintaining population registers, teaching literacy, vaccinations, and basic medical care are not subjects of political dispute but fundamental standards.
Painting the Walls White with Black Paint
The problem, however, was that Chávez “never relinquished power once he had gained it,” and the economic model based on nationalization began, over time, to produce disastrous results. After the death of the charismatic leader, his successor Nicolás Maduro also governed in an authoritarian manner, but without the leadership skills of “El Comandante,” and proved incapable of even containing the inevitable crisis.
Life in Venezuela began to resemble the late-communist era in Eastern Europe, marked by chronic shortages of even the most basic goods, eventually degenerating into a catastrophic humanitarian crisis. The International Monetary Fund estimated that inflation reached 1,700,000 percent in 2018. Crime also spiraled out of control: in the tragic year of 2016, Venezuela recorded 28,500 homicides—nearly one per 1,000 inhabitants. All of this triggered mass emigration. According to data from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, nearly 8 million people—around 25 percent of the country’s population—left Venezuela between 2012 and 2024.
A Crouching Bear, a Hidden Dragon, and Others
At the same time, Chávez and Maduro pursued an ambitious foreign policy, financed largely by oil exports. By establishing organizations such as Petrocaribe and ALBA, Caracas was able to exert real influence over election outcomes, government formation, and the support of left-wing forces throughout Latin America—from Caribbean island states, through Nicaragua, Bolivia, and Ecuador, to Cuba. In the latter case, Venezuela replaced Russia as the main supplier of oil, thereby contributing to the continued survival of the regime. In Nicaragua, the victory of communist guerrilla leader Daniel Ortega in 2006—whom some sources describe as a KGB agent—would not have been possible without bribing voters through free fuel deliveries.
At the same time, as many commentators note, Chávez established very close political cooperation with Russia and China, as well as Iran and North Korea—an alignment that conservative commentators in the United States in the first decade of the 21st century referred to as an “axis of evil.” A separate issue was Venezuela’s support for various left-wing terrorist and subversive movements around the world, ranging from granting asylum to ETA terrorists to facilitating drug and arms trafficking between Colombia’s FARC, Russia, and the wider world.
What Comes Next?
In this context, expressions of outrage over the American intervention are surprising. From the perspective of the announced return to the Monroe Doctrine, Washington has achieved several objectives. First, it has demonstrated that the United States will not allow further expansion by any external power in the Americas. While the original doctrine from 202 years ago targeted European empires, this time it is aimed squarely at China and Russia. The issues of Ukraine and Taiwan are also impossible to ignore; in this light, the operation should likely be seen as a warning against further aggression. To be certain, however, one must closely monitor the peace negotiations concerning the war in Ukraine, as there is some risk that the matter could become part of a bargain with Russia and the price of concessions to it—hopefully not.
Second, oil sales to the United States will almost certainly increase. This may seem surprising, but despite at times harsh rhetoric and existing sanctions, by the end of 2025 around 17 percent of Venezuela’s oil exports—approximately 150,000 barrels per day—were destined for the U.S. market. The outlook is even better, as Venezuela possesses the largest oil reserves in the world, accounting for nearly 20 percent of all known global reserves. While these reserves are mostly in the form of oil sands, steadily improving extraction technologies are gradually increasing their accessibility. Third, there will be an opportunity to cut off supplies to Cuba and other political satellites of Venezuela, creating a chance there as well to dismantle regimes in the face of a likely crisis. It would be an extraordinary achievement if President Trump ultimately succeeded in toppling the communist dictatorship on the “island hot as a volcano.”
As for Venezuela’s own future, it is difficult at present to say how independent its policy will be. President Trump’s reluctance to hand power to the opposition is, to a certain extent, justified, given that it largely originates from the old, corrupt elites. On the other hand, statements about “running [Venezuela] for some time, until a safe, proper, and reasonable transition can be carried out” are hard not to interpret as a declaration of establishing some form of neocolonial protectorate.
Nevertheless, there are well-founded hopes that the humanitarian crisis in the country will come to an end and that Venezuela will recover economically. It is, in fact, difficult to imagine anything worse occurring in this respect.
About the Author
Dr. hab. Dominik Smyrgała is a university professor at the Faculty of Economics and Management at Łazarski University and the author of the book The Oil Axis: Hugo Chávez’s Latin American Empire.