Translated from GegenStandpunkt 1-2026
Venezuela and so on
America’s chosen people
are taking their hemisphere backI. On the American people and their new old mission under MAGA leadership
To be a president of peace who ends “pointless and endless wars,” who rejects a failed policy of “regime change” followed by “utopian nation building,” who rejects the role of “world policeman” that takes on the “idealistic” task of solving the “world’s problems” with the destructive power of his own military and instead focuses on protecting his own homeland – Trump is keeping these promises in a perhaps surprising, but definitely impressive way. In the summer, he has “wiped out,” or at least decimated, an Iranian nuclear program which can’t even come close to being capable of a producing weapon, with a massive bombing raid. In the fall, he turns the Caribbean and the eastern Pacific into a battleground for an “open ended” war against drug traffickers – or at least against sailors who could be drug traffickers. At Christmas, he gives his Christian supporters the gift of a missile attack on an ISIS outpost in northern Nigeria, with the prospect of further operations in this “country of particular concern.”[1] At the beginning of the new year, he has Venezuelan head of state Nicolás Maduro kidnapped in a spectacular surprise attack and dragged before a US court like a common criminal; he then declares the Venezuelan oil industry to be property of the USA and his own administration to be the authority in charge of the Venezuelan state: “We’re going to run the country to make sure that that country is run properly.” (Trump, January 3, 2026) Immediately afterwards, he announces further attacks and coups in Latin America, as well as the annexation of Greenland, because America needs it and can take it. After the Iranian leadership continues to confuse Trump’s ultimatum to make a “fair deal” with the US within two weeks in negotiations that could involve anything but total surrender, Trump decapitates the theocracy, both in terms of personnel and material resources.
MAGA’s allegedly war weary fans probably didn’t see all that coming. To be sure, the fact that Trump throws them for a loop only in the rarest of cases[2] testifies not to the unprincipled obedience of followers to their leader, but rather to the deep consensus between above and below on the essence of all patriotic war weariness. This consists of an offended right to success in all the violent affairs that the leadership puts on the agenda – namely, to a success that benefits the nation. Of course, in America, the greatest military power in world history, the relevant standard of success is somewhat higher: its wars – regardless of their scale – must not only be won, but also demonstrate and reproduce its own overwhelming superiority. So the MAGA movement is actually quite conventional. Its supporters are in any case not a foreign element in the land of the free and home of the brave, but rather fundamentalists of the “common sense” of a superpower, which is what the US just happens to be.
This is precisely what Trump himself emphasizes when he presents his Venezuelan coup not simply as his original, brilliant idea, but as an ingenious return to an actually axiomatic, yet unfortunately neglected, American tradition:
“The Monroe Doctrine is a big deal, but we’ve superseded it by a lot. It was very important, but we forgot about it. We don’t forget about it anymore. Under our new national security strategy, American dominance in the Western hemisphere will never be questioned again. Won’t happen.” (Trump press conference, January 3, 2026)
His claim is actually not particularly original. The newly announced “Trump amendment” to the “Monroe Doctrine” of 1823 differs from the original mainly in that Trump is aggressively committed to something that Latin America may only have found out gradually over the course of the subsequent two centuries: The prohibition back then on Europeans interfering in Latin American affairs was never intended to be anything but an imperative for America’s hegemony over the entirety of the two American continents.[3] The return to this noble imperialist mission also includes a return to a sense of national identity and mission which, in Trump’s view, can unfortunately only be found in American schoolbooks – and, even then, in a critical tone! Already at his inauguration, and even more so in the wake of the successful action in Venezuela, Trump extols the spirit of “Manifest Destiny” that once animated the unstoppable conquests of America’s chosen people. In this spirit, the Trump administration sees the more successful version of the “civilizational self-confidence” (US National Security Strategy, p. 5), which the descendants of the European colonial powers have unfortunately lost, which is why they now face a self-inflicted “civilizational erasure.” (ibid., p. 25)[4] The spirit of a people divinely chosen to conquer and civilize is therefore neither to be criticized nor “come to terms with” because of what it did, but must be brought back to life.
The revival begins at home.[5] The Trump administration, with its mass deportation offensive targeting 3,000 deportations per day, is making it clear that it is about more than just the full enforcement of immigration law. Not that this could ever be done cleanly and surgically. Given that the immigrants who are to be rooted out are hardly alien to the melting pot of American class society, such a “law and order” fanaticism would in itself amount to an unprecedented act of violence. The administration makes a point – most recently in Minneapolis – of the likelihood of confusing its actions with those of an occupying regime, and at the same time to the perception of these actions as a “liberation” of US citizens from invaders and terrorists through the salutary effects of overwhelming American power. When ICE agents raid Latinos at their workplaces and in their neighborhoods, beat them like dangerous criminals before handcuffing them, and make a show of treating protesters as enemies of the state who must be eliminated if necessary, then the interest in humiliation and in effectively executed revenge is all too obvious – especially given the government’s diligent public relations efforts. This violent exuberance is not at all beside the point. The issue at stake for the government – namely, the right of the people to feel completely at home as true Americans – is obviously only truly palpable when the all-important difference between the American people and all those who have somehow and at some point infiltrated into this blessed community can be experienced as a relationship of unambiguous dominance. It is therefore only fitting that these true Americans are not merely supposed to welcome this robust liberation offensive as the act of a government that is truly connected to the people. Rather, they should take action themselves as a vigorous popular movement. The government is making this possible: with approximately $30 billion per year from the recently passed “big beautiful bill” – roughly the same amount as Turkey’s annual military budget – the Trump administration is massively increasing the personnel at various security agencies and pursuing a recruitment strategy that makes it obvious who it wants to hire. If the liberal press sees this as “flirting” with the ideals of “white supremacy” and the glorification of the genocidal conquest of the continent from the Native Americans, then it is certainly showing its sense of understatement. The administration is promoting its deportation offensive as a wonderful opportunity for Americans who are certain they belong to a master race to ensure that this becomes not only their own conviction, but the reality of their homeland.[6] This – especially when combined with the celebration of a revival of the magnificent “Monroe Doctrine” – is a clear message not only to the vanguard recruited in this way, but also to the true US citizens, to the illegal immigrants who are to be smoked out, and finally to those Americans who tolerate such non-American subhumans in their “communities” and sometimes even take to the streets on their behalf: Here action is being taken by a people who deserve an intact homeland with secure borders because they will tolerate no limits to their dominance by others. This people is one who, according to Trump, will “never again forget” their hemispheric prerogative.
II. The Latin American backyard is brought under control
Civil extortion
What exactly this privilege of the people consists of – not merely in terms of their unlimited sense of justice, but as a practical guideline – was put into practice by the Trump administration immediately after taking office and long before the written proclamation of the “Donroe Doctrine”:[7]
– It is pressuring numerous Latin American states to assist in the cleansing of the US homeland. They are to take back or accept those who are being deported – their own citizens, of course, but also foreigners – since they’re all the same race anyway.[8] Failure to provide assistance, e.g., the Colombian government’s refusal to accept a US military plane carrying a load of deported Colombians, is immediately punished; in this case, with punitive tariffs which bring about a remarkably swift realization of the advantages of cooperation. Not only in Colombia – some states understand the message so well that they immediately take the initiative and offer themselves as transshipment points and dumping grounds for the deported immigrants. But despite all the praise from Washington for such willingness to help, the partners are not kept in the dark about the true nature of this partnership: the aim is to correct a skewed imperialist hierarchy between the American master race and its inferior neighbors, to reverse the much lamented “reverse colonization” that Trump and Co. see in illegal immigration. The blatant disregard for the sovereignty of the immigrants’ countries of origin and now destination is a key aspect of their disposal. In some cases, this can be handled cooperatively, but it should not be confused with cooperation.
– It declares Latin American drug cartels to be terrorist organizations. In doing so, it announces the freedoms that the US military will take not only against such “narco-terrorists,” but also against the state authorities on whose soil the cartels operate, e.g., Mexico, Colombia, and Venezuela. The US thus grants itself the right to strike militarily at its own discretion – up to the point of direct invasion. This, of course, is not based on the standpoint that it is invading foreign territories, but rather on the certainty that it is finally cleaning up areas that have long been under American control. Local sovereigns at most can have a say in the extent to which they will cooperate with the US military in relieving it of the associated burdens.
– It forces Panama to grant special privileges for the passage of American ships through the Panama Canal, prohibits Chinese companies from owning the canal ports, and forbids the country from further participation in China’s “Silk Road” initiative. For now, Trump is satisfied with this type of redress for waiving the canal’s reappropriation, which for him is and remains a requirement of imperialist justice. Of course, the requirement remains in force – as the demand that the sovereignty granted to the neighbor proves to be the functional equivalent of direct American control over its territory.[9]
– It immediately declares a national emergency when a Brazilian judge sentences MAGA friend J. Bolsonaro to prison and sets certain limits on MAGA agent E. Musk’s social media business.[10] Trump cannot be accused of interfering in the internal affairs of foreign governments – well, they are taking place in the US hemisphere. Conversely, such high-handedness is tantamount to an attack on the American homeland.
– In Argentina, it averts an impending election defeat for MAGA friend J. Milei by extending a credit lifeline.[11] Meanwhile, it threatens voters in Honduras with the withdrawal of all financial support for the country if they do not cast their votes on the only party deemed suitable for MAGA. In these cases, too, the Trump administration sees the internal affairs of other countries as its own; by casting the right vote, the voters there can spare themselves the damage that America would otherwise have to inflict in order to bind an elected government to its actual client.
– Finally, it invokes its determination to get rid of the USA’s traditional enemies in the region once and for all – Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela.
And the Trump administration quickly comes to the conclusion that the path to restoring American primacy in the region runs primarily through Venezuela.
Preparing an exemplary case
The irreconcilable hostility of the USA to the regime of Nicolás Maduro, which he inherited from his socialist predecessor Hugo Chávez, is certainly nothing new. Nor is it exactly insignificant what the USA and its Western partners have already done to bring down the regime – with its “bolivarian” welfare capitalism financed by oil dollars and its explicitly US-critical self-assertion program.[12] Nevertheless, the accusations that the Trump administration has up its sleeve in its second term are quite innovative:
– Maduro is declared the head of a drug cartel responsible for thousands of American drug-related deaths.[13] Maduro is therefore not a statesman, nor even the illegitimate leader of a rogue state, but a common criminal and mass murdering war criminal all in one. The Trump administration hasn’t overlooked the facts: virtually no lethal fentanyl is shipped from Venezuela, but rather a great deal of cocaine; this, in turn, hardly ever goes to the USA, but almost entirely to Europe; the “Cartel des los Soles,” of which Maduro is said to be the head, is not a cartel at all, but rather a derogatory term for the involvement of some Venezuelan generals in the drug trade. But one has to admit: such constructions fit the US agenda much better than the facts. They give the USA the right to deal with Maduro as it sees fit.
– The Venezuelans, millions of whom have fled the misery at home and thousands of whom have made it to the US, where the Biden administration welcomed them as proof of Maduro’s malevolence, are being declared Venezuelan sleeper-cell agents who have been sent to “poison the blood” of real Americans in the long term. Nobody even has to believe this; the Trump administration simply insists that the freedoms to which America has declared itself entitled must be accepted: the freedom to wage war against the very country to which all refugees are to be deported as quickly and completely as possible.[14]
– The nationalization of the Venezuelan oil industry in 1976 and the subsequent expropriation of US oil companies in 2007 are retrospectively classified as the theft of American property.[15] The Maduro regime is not only an illegitimate government, but also the unlawful possessor of American assets. “Our oil!” is to be taken literally: “Are we just supposed to allow a communist to steal our stuff in our hemisphere and do nothing? Great powers don’t act like that. The United States, thanks to President Trump’s leadership, is a great power again. Everyone should take note.” (Vice President JD Vance on X, January 4, 2026)
– And certainly not just Maduro. He also faces the more traditional American accusation of allowing himself to be made a tool of powers that engage in an anti-Americanism of a far greater caliber. This is precisely something a great power cannot allow. The stolen “stuff” in question here is its most important asset: the exclusive power to determine by what means and for what ends the sovereigns in this region claim their peoples and territories. This asset cannot be shared. The Trump administration explicitly reiterates this position in early December in a “National Security Strategy” (NSS), in which it lists many crimes and a whole range of threats that must be combated in Latin America: e.g., illegal immigration; drugs; lost business opportunities that go to the wrong powers; bastions for their wrongful influence, etc. But all these individual problem cases boil down to the same problem and the same solution:
“After years of neglect, the United States will reassert and enforce the Monroe Doctrine to restore American preeminence in the Western Hemisphere, and to protect our homeland and our access to key geographies throughout the region. We will deny non-Hemispheric competitors the ability to position forces or other threatening capabilities, or to own or control strategically vital assets, in our Hemisphere. This ‘Trump Corollary’ to the Monroe Doctrine is a common-sense and potent restoration of American power and priorities, consistent with American security interests.” (NSS, p. 15)
Of course, when “non-Hemispheric competitors” are talked about, the People’s Republic of China is primarily meant – after all, it is the only power that has the “capabilities” to seriously “threaten” America as a rival, and it has become the largest trading partner of most Latin American countries. However, the fact that China is not explicitly mentioned in this passage or anywhere else in the relevant section of the NSS is not due to diplomatic restraint, but fits in perfectly with the threat analysis. Because China, as the strongest rival, is indeed an urgent problem in Latin America. However, far more important to the Trump administration is the problem that China points out – namely, that the region lacks a clear, politically established and guaranteed subordination to the USA. The Trump administration is now tackling this problem: China is to be sidelined as an imperialist rival, but not by the US reclaiming its position as the largest trading partner and strategic hegemon – again – and turning the region into an anti-Chinese bulwark, but rather by finally and consistently claiming Latin America as its exclusive vested right. Not as a mother country vis-à-vis its colonies, nor merely as the strongest power among strong powers, but as a power that has absolute freedom to determine the content and scope of the sovereignty of others. Thus, the kind of subordination that America has repeatedly enforced with violence throughout its imperialist history is declared the officially proclaimed “common sense” of all hemispheric relations – not as a consequence that America draws from the presence of a Chinese rival, but as the logically inevitable result of American greatness.
At least, that is the American claim.
War – what else?
That this claim remains ridiculously exaggerated if it is merely posed; that the restoration of American dominance can only be achieved through a proven willingness and ability to break foreign sovereignty – this is the guiding principle behind the deployment of US military power which America decides to take step by step. The Trump administration sees itself faced with the peculiar necessity of proving this and the extent to which it is capable of enforcing its claims without any apparent necessity. Force must be used in a way that makes an impression, not only by being successful, but also by testifying to the inevitability of the outcome and to how the US government can always keep the decision to proceed open in one way or another. There is no substitute for demonstrating this freedom.
The Trump administration initially provides evidence of this with a naval fleet named “Southern Spear.” It doubles the bounty on Maduro from $25 million to $50 million, sends two aircraft carrier strike groups with destroyers and submarines to the Venezuelan coast, and stations armed forces in Puerto Rico, the Dominican Republic, and Trinidad and Tobago. The fleet initially directs its combined firepower in small but extremely asymmetrical doses at speedboats carrying “narco-terrorists” of various origins who are allegedly transporting drugs to America, thereby making themselves guilty of “chemical warfare” against US citizens. In doing so, the War Department makes liberal use of the tried-and-tested exceptions created by its hated predecessor Obama for worldwide drone strikes against Islamic terrorists – without, of course, even suggesting that it needs to prove the legality of its own actions to any authority other than itself. On the contrary: international law only discredits itself when its rules stand in the way of American claims to dominance. And Trump clearly revels in the sense of total powerlessness in the face of his arbitrariness, a feeling that spreads across Latin American waters:
“We have noticed that there are no ships in the ocean anymore … When first we went there were hundreds of boats. Now there are no boats. I wonder why. Meaning: no drugs are coming across. Probably stopping some fishermen too. I mean, to be honest, if I were a fisherman, I wouldn't want to go fishing. I’d say, ‘Man, maybe they think I have drugs downstairs, then...’” (Trump, September 16, 2025)
The cynicism is appropriate, serving to clarify that America is not acting out of the distress of an affected victim, but with the freedom of an unquestionably superior belligerent that strikes solely at its own discretion and with all the asymmetry required. The national security that America insists on includes the insecurity of all other states, both friendly and hostile; they should know and feel that they are at America’s mercy, unable to defend themselves when America is serious about achieving its goals, whatever they may be.
This is the spirit in which the next steps in the escalation are taken: the US military imposes a blockade on all ships that the government accuses of circumventing US sanctions on Venezuelan oil exports and seizes a number of sanctioned oil tankers along with their cargo. The US thus completes its economic strangulation of the Maduro regime and at the same time demonstrates its complete control over the entire maritime area; even a Russian nuclear power, to which a pursued tanker changes its flag en route in order to deter the US military from attacking, doesn’t help the ship or the Venezuelan state. And finally, it makes it clear that Trump’s claim to ownership over this region is to be taken literally:
“Speaking to reporters in Florida on Monday, Trump said of the oil ‘we’re going to keep it’, adding: ‘Maybe we will sell it, maybe we will keep it. Maybe we’ll use it in the Strategic Reserves. We’re keeping the ships also.’” (BBC.com, December 23, 2025)
Meanwhile, negotiations are held with Maduro that are not really negotiations at all because their sole purpose is to make it clear that Maduro has nothing to demand and can’t expect any help from his allies. No concession, however subservient, seems sufficient:
“Venezuelan officials, hoping to end their country’s clash with the United States, offered the Trump administration a dominant stake in Venezuela’s oil and other mineral wealth in discussions that lasted for months, according to multiple people close to the talks. The far-reaching offer remained on the table as the Trump administration called the government of President Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela a “narco-terror cartel,” amassed warships in the Caribbean and began blowing up boats that American officials say were carrying drugs from Venezuela. Under a deal discussed between a senior U.S. official and Mr. Maduro’s top aides, the Venezuelan strongman offered to open up all existing and future oil and gold projects to American companies, give preferential contracts to American businesses, reverse the flow of Venezuelan oil exports from China to the United States, and slash his country’s energy and mining contracts with Chinese, Iranian and Russian firms.” (New York Times, October 18, 2025)
That Maduro invariably insists on remaining in office is obviously unreasonable to the proponents of the “Donroe Doctrine.” They feel a need for forceful proof that can’t be adequately satisfied by successful blackmail, i.e., a civilian substitute for militarily enforced subjugation. So the US seizes the opportunity to satisfy this need for proof in the only acceptable way: with the successful commando operation and kidnapping of Maduro, which testifies to the impressive capabilities of the US military and is celebrated as such[16], it embarrasses Venezuela’s claim to sovereignty and security; and by humiliating the head of state and his first lady, who are perp-walked before a global audience as pathetic petty criminals, it embarrasses any conceit that they, as statesmen, can demand any respect whatsoever. The fact that the operation is officially classified as a police raid rather than an act of war is only partly intended as a legal maneuver to circumvent the obligation to obtain approval from the US Congress. This documents how little America considers the decapitation of foreign governments to be a serious challenge to its military capabilities or even an extraterritorial operation.[17] The great emergency that Maduro causes America, according to US government propaganda, is dealt with by this government without any hint of a military emergency.
The continuation of the case is consistent with this successful demonstration of the violent freedom of the US.
III. The beginning of an imperialist friendship of a new kind
The Venezuelan regime is placed under the policy-making authority of the USA
A “regime change” with forced elections, or even the installation of the Venezuelan opposition party – which is far more friendly to the US and Trump and which the Trump administration also recognizes as the country’s legitimate leadership – is out of the question. Trump needs neither a party ideologically close to him nor a political figure who is willing to make any gesture of political allegiance. This is precisely what the arch-conservative Venezuelan opposition politician Maria Corina Machado – a dream candidate for previous US foreign policy makers – has to learn; her calculated flattery may well appeal to Trump, but even that will not elicit any political commitment from him.[18] A far-reaching restructuring of the entire political apparatus, such as the eradication of a Bolivarian “deep state” analogous to the political purge that Trump himself considers necessary in the USA, is also out of the question:
“You know, in Iraq everyone was removed. There were no generals left, there was no one left to run the government. The result was chaos… And that’s exactly where ISIS came from, from the military and all those other people. They formed ISIS. That was handled very badly. But this is being handled very well.” (Trump in an NBC interview, January 7, 2026)
What’s decisive, rather, is the secure control over the country that the Maduro regime demonstrably had; the terrible oppression that the Trump administration always cited and continues to cite to delegitimize a regime hostile to the US is now its most important qualification. This makes the recently deposed regime a capable enforcer of American demands – provided it understands that it is in a very direct relationship of subservience to the USA, namely a very personal relationship with Trump himself: If the new head of government Rodriguez “doesn’t do what’s right, she is going to pay a very big price, probably bigger than Maduro.” (Trump in an interview with The Atlantic, January 4, 2026) That’s how realistic the man is: to secure the required obedience of a foreign government, he doesn’t rely on intellectual affinity, but on the persuasive power of American destructive capabilities.
The Venezuelan oil industry is declared a vested right of the US state
At the same time, Trump doesn’t stop with the subjugation of the country’s political superstructure; he also appropriates its only significant economic basis. According to the laws of geography and geopolitics, oil belongs solely in the hands of the USA:
“What we’re not going to allow is for the oil industry in Venezuela to be controlled by adversaries of the United States. You have to understand, why does China need their oil? Why does Russia need their oil? Why does Iran need their oil? They’re not even in this continent. This is the Western Hemisphere. This is where we live, and we’re not going to allow the Western Hemisphere to be a base of operation for adversaries, competitors and rivals of the United States.” (Rubio in an NBC interview, January 4, 2026)
The previously sanctioned or blocked oil will not be released back to the world market or the international companies operating there: up to 50 million barrels of Venezuelan oil will be confiscated; the relevant sales rights will be allocated to selected intermediaries selected at Trump’s discretion.[19] The White House has also declared null and void the claims of US corporations for compensation for losses incurred as a result of their former expropriation.[20] Instead, Trump declares himself the authority who will allocate the relevant business opportunities – both with regard to the oil already extracted and to the future Venezuelan oil industry in general.
And American corporations will own the future of the Venezuelan oil industry, whose reconstruction they are privileged and expected to profit from:
“We’re going to be making the decision as to which oil companies are going to go in. We’re going to cut a deal with the companies … You’re dealing with us directly and not dealing with Venezuela at all. We don’t want you to deal with Venezuela.” (Trump at a meeting with US oil companies, January 9, 2026) “We’re going to have our very large United States oil companies, the biggest anywhere in the world, go in, spend billions of dollars, fix the badly broken infrastructure, the oil infrastructure, and start making money for the country.” (Trump, press conference, January 3, 2026)
“For the country” – which country? Definitely for Venezuela – whose oil wealth is now a licensed commodity according to the USA’s own calculations. The proceeds from the sale of the confiscated barrels, which are still formally said to be the sovereign property of Venezuela, are paid into a US Treasury account in Qatar; they will remain there until the Trump administration decides whether and which Venezuelan government it will ultimately recognize as sovereign.[21] Until then, the de facto government in Venezuela must submit a budget to the US government, which will be reviewed before US sanctions are suspended and the proceeds allocated to the government. This is certainly not a case of “nation building,” but rather the establishment of a new type of state: the former oil state, which has been stripped of sovereignty over its source of revenue, is given a new basis on which to manage its state reproduction: this consists of a formally conceded, materially maintained sovereignty financed by Venezuelan oil. Secretary of State Rubio comments particularly humorously on this: “The money never enters our hands … We only control the disbursement of the money. We don’t control the actual money.” (CNBC, February 11, 2026)
Another question is whether and to what extent the request to the American oil companies fits their business calculations:
“The vast majority of Venezuela’s oil reserves consist of extremely heavy crude with a high sulfur content... This heavy oil can only be extracted at high cost, fetches significantly lower prices on the market, and must be blended with lighter oil fractions to be usable at all. The energy consulting firm Rystad Energy has largely removed Venezuela’s EHO resources from its statistics as uneconomical to extract.” (Le Monde Diplomatique, Feb. 12, 2026)
“It will likely be difficult to convince companies to make risky billion-dollar investments in Venezuela. While the country is ‘tempting’ due to the world’s largest known oil reserves... given the poor state of the sector and the political challenges, companies would likely be ‘very cautious,’ says McNally. Also because they still have memories of the nationalization of the Venezuelan oil sector in 2007 and the expropriation of Western corporations, in some cases without compensation... Furthermore, the current market situation argues against a risky investment venture: There is currently a global oversupply of oil. The price of a barrel of WTI is trading below $60 – close to a five-year low. And why should U.S. corporations pump billions into a dilapidated infrastructure in a politically unstable country when companies like ExxonMobil have tapped into a massive oil reserve right next door in Guyana?” (Handelsblatt, January 9, 2026)
The head of the US oil company Exxon puts it bluntly: under current economic and political conditions, the country is “uninvestable.” The Trump administration must demonstrate the necessary political and economic security before oil companies will bless this industry with their capital. This finding prompts Trump to respond in a way that shows much more than defiant disappointment:
“I didn’t like Exxon’s response. You know, we have so many interested parties that want it, I’d probably be inclined to keep Exxon out. They’re playing too cute.” (January 11, 1926)
Trump wants to be understood correctly. The invited businessmen have a national mission to fulfill. They have to complete the political takeover of this state economically, to confirm it as a worthwhile endeavor. In this case, they have to prove that American power is an economically productive force of a direct and at the same time exclusive character: it does not secure the conditions for global business so that stateless capital can come into play at its own discretion; rather, it appropriates the benefits of global business for the fatherland. This business is conducted on behalf of the American state and its goals; the relevant companies must do their business on this basis:
“When it comes to Venezuela, too, their interests do not align. The country’s oil production cannot be ramped up overnight; according to experts, investments in the hundreds of billions are required. Trump knows this, but he sees Venezuela’s massive oil reserves as a versatile leverage tool for future conflicts with China, Russia, or the oil monarchies in the Middle East. He wants to have this leverage at his disposal as soon as possible – certainly before the end of his term. To make that happen, companies would have to invest now.” (NZZ, January 9, 2025)
IV. The leverage effect of a successful military operation: on the southern backyard, the entire hemisphere, the allies, the world
From the outset, the Trump administration has made it clear that the benefits of the presidential kidnapping are not actually wrapped up with the useful re-orientation of this state and this chunk of the oil industry. In any case, the celebrated “efficiency” of the “surgical” military operation does not lie in the fact that it was so small, that America risked and sacrificed very little blood and wealth. It lies precisely in the particularly favorable ratio between cost and benefit: it “demonstrates American military excellence, which makes people afraid to cross us in the future” (Vance on Fox News, January 8, 2026). The useful effect of the successful strike must be exploited immediately.
The backyard
First in Latin America: The very next day, Trump, with sovereign calmness, threatens similar actions against the governments in Colombia – “Colombia is ruled by a very sick man!” “Petro better watch his ass!” – and Cuba – “They are ready to fall.” “Make a deal before it's too late!” The Mexican president – another “good woman” – is warned that “Mexico has to get their act together,” otherwise “something’s going to have to be done,” namely action taken against the drug cartels active there with Americans “hitting land.” The initial results are quite pleasing for Trump: his threat against the Colombian government of a verbatim repeat of the Maduro coup in Colombia quickly brings them to their senses, or at least to be more accommodating in satisfying American security needs.[22] With a presidential decree threatening additional tariffs on any country that supplies Cuba with oil, Trump exacerbates the country’s already dire oil shortage, leading to massive daily power outages, among other things; according to reports, the entire economy is on the verge of collapse. Not a drop of oil flows to the island from Venezuela, while Mexico, Cuba’s other main supplier, temporarily suspends its deliveries. The Mexican government attempts a combination of diplomatic resistance and political cooperation.[23] The Nicaraguan government is also impressed and, for the time being, manages to stay out of the line of fire.[24]
A frozen bit of Europe in America’s home hemisphere
Such clear evidence of American superiority indicates to Trump, as if by its own accord, that the northern segment of his hemisphere does not have to remain so alien to America, and indeed must not: The military success in Venezuela shows him how much his long-standing interest in the annexation of Greenland is really his irrefutable right, even and especially if the island happens to be under the sovereignty of a NATO ally.[25] Why America needs it can be illustrated by listing various economic and strategic necessities and applications that Trump is happy to provide: e.g., control over critical minerals and access to the Arctic, deterrence of Russia and China, whose mere presence in the region is evidence of “aggression,” and a crucial base for Trump's “Golden Dome” missile defense system. Of course, Trump doesn’t take the measure of such concrete needs. It is no coincidence that he refuses to be appeased by all the attempts by Denmark and the other European NATO partners to buy off the USA’s claim to conquest by offering to meet American security demands through new partnership agreements. Trump is all about fundamentals:
“Ownership is very important … Because that’s what I feel is psychologically needed for success. I think that ownership gives you a thing that you can’t do with, you’re talking about a lease or a treaty. Ownership gives you things and elements that you can’t get from just signing a document.” (Trump in an interview with the New York Times, January 8, 2026)
What do these “things and elements” consist of? It’s precisely the right of a great power to determine this in complete freedom – on the basis of its total control over land and people and without regard for treaties with other sovereigns – even friendly ones. America measures itself solely by this standard: by the reasonableness of large, powerful nations that are entitled to as much greatness as they can obtain through power.[26]
This makes it clear what the significance of a military alliance is for Trump, also and especially in the case of NATO with its morality of indissoluble solidarity combined with its pronounced, unquestionable power asymmetry between the leading power and its allies. The larger and far more substantial case of this is certainly the war in Ukraine. But what becomes all the more clear on the secondary front in Greenland is the absoluteness of the demands Trump makes of his allies. For Trump, such an alliance cannot possibly consist of the mutual affirmation of a firm unity between still competing state powers and their mutual dependence. Such a construct is more than just this contradiction; it is a blatant crime against the strongest power in the alliance. An alliance worthy of the name is rather a mutual commitment to the fact that competition between the allies has been decided and the clear hierarchy among them is recognized without question. The superior leading power thus enjoys an unlimited right to the absolute validity of its will – including, and especially, in relation to its allies. Such a power doesn’t allow itself to be obligated to any defined, however shared, imperialistic purpose that reliably binds leadership and followers to each other. The claim of this leadership sees no limit in the sovereignty of the partners it leads – nor should it, because it defines its security solely through its unqualified superiority over other powers, which is always confirmed by acts of practical submission. This is a claim that is addressed all the more at demonstrably weaker partners. But Trump does not push his claim to the point of territorial conquest and the dissolution of NATO for the time being. After talks with NATO chief Rutte and the adoption of a “framework for a future agreement,” Trump suddenly declares himself satisfied – with what exactly remains unclear.[27] In any case, Trump has not withdrawn or even relativized his claim to the island – he didn’t even negotiate with Denmark about it. It is precisely this vagueness about what he has actually settled for that reflects the absoluteness of his imperialistic claim: he takes his demand off the table with absolute sovereignty and retains it as a permanent reservation.
America explains its civilizing mission to the Europeans
Against this backdrop, Trump sends his Secretary of State to Munich to assure the allies that MAGA imperialism, as practiced in Ukraine and Greenland, for example, need not spell the end of the transatlantic friendship. It can and should live on, but for this to happen, the esteemed partners must be reminded of what really makes this friendship so great. In his speech at the Munich Security Conference, Rubio does not want to get bogged down in discussing detailed issues – such as the level of NATO defense spending:
“These are important questions. They are. But they are not the fundamental one. The fundamental question we must answer at the outset is what exactly are we defending, because armies do not fight for abstractions. Armies fight for a people; armies fight for a nation. Armies fight for a way of life. And that is what we are defending: a great civilization that has every reason to be proud of its history, confident of its future, and aims to always be the master of its own economic and political destiny...We are bound to one another by the deepest bonds that nations could share, forged by centuries of shared history, Christian faith, culture, heritage, language, ancestry, and the sacrifices our forefathers made together for the common civilization to which we have fallen heir. And so this is why we Americans may sometimes come off as a little direct and urgent in our counsel. This is why President Trump demands seriousness and reciprocity from our friends here in Europe. The reason why, my friends, is because we care deeply. We care deeply about your future and ours... We want Europe to be strong. We believe that Europe must survive, because the two great wars of the last century serve for us as history’s constant reminder that ultimately, our destiny is and will always be intertwined with yours, because we know that the fate of Europe will never be irrelevant to our own.” (Rubio at the Munich Security Conference, February 14, 1926; the following quotes are also taken from this speech)
Europeans have such a pressing need for “direct” and “urgent” reminders of the uniqueness and superiority of their “civilization” because – at least from Washington’s perspective – they have forgotten the truth about their own history:
“At the time of that first gathering [of the Munich Security Conference, then called the “Defense Science Conference”], Soviet communism was on the march. Thousands of years of Western civilization hung in the balance. At that time, victory was far from certain. But we were driven by a common purpose. We were unified not just by what we were fighting against; we were unified by what we were fighting for. And together, Europe and America prevailed … But the euphoria of this triumph led us to a dangerous delusion: that we had entered, quote, ‘the end of history’; that every nation would now be a liberal democracy; that the ties formed by trade and by commerce alone would now replace nationhood; that the rules-based global order – an overused term – would now replace the national interest; and that we would now live in a world without borders where everyone became a citizen of the world. This was a foolish idea that ignored both human nature and it ignored the lessons of over 5,000 years of recorded human history.”
Does the Secretary of State himself realize how “foolish” his own “idea” is regarding the conclusions his transatlantic predecessors supposedly have drawn from their victory over the Soviet alternative system? It is as if they had lost thir appetite for national interests precisely because of the epochal gain in power they had achieved for their nations by establishing a truly global capitalism. As if by committing all nations to a set of rules of competition in which they are the superior competitors, they wanted to relinquish any claim to national regulatory power over this competition. As if they had ever meant anything else by the “end of history” than their claim to never again tolerate any challenge to their power to determine what constitutes the wealth of nations, by what means it is to be created and secured – and by which means it just isn’t. It is true that the European members of the transatlantic imperialist alliance have always celebrated their “ever closer” union into an EU – which has become a matter of great importance to them precisely because of the relentless competitive spirit of its leading powers in the global competition between nations – as the overcoming of narrow-minded nationalisms. But this testifies more to a refined cynicism in cultivating their political and moral self-image than to any “foolish” anti-national “delusion” they might have seriously indulged in. The US Secretary of State must have noticed, at the latest from the actions of this union, that a contradictory yet unmistakable program of competition between nations is at work here.
The same applies in principle to the largest supranational institution in the modern world order, the UN: All invocations of a triumph of international friendship over the warlike egoism of nations, which has never been truly vibrant but is nonetheless alive, cannot hide the fact that in this community of nations a select circle of decisive subjects faces a large mass of objects who are entitled to vote. What exactly does this Secretary of State find so objectionable about this institutionalized “end of history”? Rubio certainly doesn’t mention the real limitations and threats that the US would face in this context; these too are details he doesn’t want to get bogged down in. The very spirit of such inter- and supranational institutions, to whose creation and existence the US has undoubtedly made significant contributions with its power and money, is intolerable for Rubio because they actually contradict the basic principle of MAGA imperialism: greatness thrives on and manifests itself in the explicit domination and subjugation of all other powers. The 5,000-year history of humankind bears witness to this primal human rationality – especially during its 500-year heyday. During that time, the races did justice to their human nature big time:
“For five centuries, before the end of the Second World War, the West had been expanding – its missionaries, its pilgrims, its soldiers, its explorers pouring out from its shores to cross oceans, settle new continents, build vast empires extending out across the globe. But in 1945, for the first time since the age of Columbus, it was contracting. Europe was in ruins. Half of it lived behind an Iron Curtain and the rest looked like it would soon follow. The great Western empires had entered into terminal decline, accelerated by godless communist revolutions and by anti-colonial uprisings that would transform the world and drape the red hammer and sickle across vast swaths of the map in the years to come. Against that backdrop, then, as now, many came to believe that the West’s age of dominance had come to an end and that our future was destined to be a faint and feeble echo of our past.”
A wonderful and wonderfully straightforward era of conquest, in which the superior nature of some ruled over the inferior nature of others. This balance of power was still completely untainted by the form and cultivated ethos of an imperialist hierarchy in which inter- and supranational institutions suggest an equality of nations that is not supported by the actual balance of power and which prevents the establishment of justice based on human nature, i.e., the corresponding resolution of the conflicts between the unequal powers. Modern Europeans should certainly learn the necessary lessons from the glorious era of their imperialist ancestors, for even the old success story threatened to come to an end in the shadow of its own success. Until salvation arrived:
“But together, our predecessors recognized that decline was a choice, and it was a choice they refused to make. This is what we did together once before, and this is what President Trump and the United States want to do again now, together with you. And this is why we do not want our allies to be weak, because that makes us weaker. We want allies who can defend themselves so that no adversary will ever be tempted to test our collective strength. This is why we do not want our allies to be shackled by guilt and shame. We want allies who are proud of their culture and of their heritage, who understand that we are heirs to the same great and noble civilization … We in America have no interest in being polite and orderly caretakers of the West’s managed decline. We do not seek to separate, but to revitalize an old friendship and renew the greatest civilization in human history... An alliance that does not allow its power to be outsourced, constrained, or subordinated to systems beyond its control; one that does not depend on others for the critical necessities of its national life; and one that does not maintain the polite pretense that our way of life is just one among many and that asks for permission before it acts.”
With such a fraternal collective – one that recognizes no higher value than that of the nation and is fully aware of its right to dominate other, subordinate peoples – the MAGA government certainly knows what to do.[1] Its members would never dream of having a right to assistance from the strongest power among them; their national pride would never allow them to become a burden on the superior might of the American leading power. Conversely, the strongest power in the alliance need not fear that the strength of its strong yet inferior partners could be anything other than a contribution to its own. With exemplary clarity, the MAGA administration disregards all boundaries of shame when it comes to not only seeing itself as the power of a master race entitled to world domination, but also asserting itself as such. In this sense, the US demands that its European partners – precisely as an integral part of a superior civilization – understand that their leading power cannot ask for “permission” out of mere politeness when, for example, it wants to carve off a “large piece of ice in the North Atlantic” from a decrepit Danish empire. The most glorious of the master races therefore cannot, of all things, make concessions on its natural right simply because a large and decisive part of “the West” lies in another hemisphere. It is precisely because America does not recognize any limits to rights that it does not enforce entirely on its own that makes it so special; it is precisely this difference between itself and its great brother nations, as well the rest of the inferior nations, that constitutes the American identity.
A Board of Peace for the world
It is in the nature of the governmental division of labor that the presidential leader of the MAGA nation expresses the imperialist claim of the USA even more clearly than his chief diplomat:
“Asked in a wide-ranging interview with The New York Times if there were any limits on his global powers, Mr. Trump said: ‘Yeah, there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.’ ‘I don’t need international law,’ he added. ‘I’m not looking to hurt people.’ When pressed further about whether his administration needed to abide by international law, Mr. Trump said, ‘I do.’ But he made clear he would be the arbiter when such constraints applied to the United States. ‘It depends what your definition of international law is,’ he said.” (New York Times, January 8, 2026)
Trump has once again made clear how he intends to define international law from now on, with a decision that is as surprising as it is fitting: He is seriously making his nation’s claim to unlimited and exclusive power over a hemisphere that extends as far as its president desires the basis for a newly founded collective global political authority: a “Board of Peacee” that is characterized by the fact that it dispenses with the UN’s hypocrisy of equality and unity among all peoples, but instead acts as a collective of sovereigns invited by its one wise chairman, Trump, depends on his unified will, and obligates participation in its fulfillment. Only in this way can world domination be achieved as a collective, only in this way can it be shared – which is to say, not at all.
Footnotes
[1] “According to the president’s statement on social media, this was retaliation for the militant group’s killing of Christians, and it was carried out ‘on a scale not seen for many years, even centuries.’ Trump stated: ‘They wanted to do it earlier. And I said: No, let’s give them a Christmas present.’” (Politico.com, December 26, 2025)
[2] “While there are some critics even among Trump’s supporters who view the military strike as a betrayal of his campaign promise, most of Trump’s Republican allies and influential conservatives are standing behind the president. Steve Bannon, a former Trump adviser and spokesperson for the conservative MAGA movement, for example, described the operation on his podcast in the hours following Maduro’s arrest as ‘bold and brilliant.’ His remarks are in line with the tone currently being struck by many in Trump’s support base.” (Zeit Online, Jan. 5, 2026)
[3] The average media consumer is thoroughly familiarized with the long history of American dominance in Latin America: the military annexation of large parts of Mexico during the expansion toward the Pacific; the seizure of numerous islands as U.S. territories and protectorates; the exploitation of Latin American lands as quasi-monopolized business sources for U.S. companies; the commissioning or instrumentalization of several military dictatorships in the fight against communism; and the covert, overt, and exposed involvement in numerous “dirty wars” in Central America.
[4] “I’m seeking immediate negotiations to, once again, discuss the acquisition of Greenland by the United States – just as we have acquired many other territories throughout our history. As many of the European nations have, they’ve acquired. There’s nothing wrong with it. Some had great, vast wealth, great, vast lands, all over the world. They went in reverse. They stuck back where they started.” (Trump in Davos, January 21, 2026)
[5] Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller explains the close connection between such territorial expansion and the vexed immigration issue: “Not long after World War II the West dissolved its empires and colonies and began sending colossal sums of taxpayer-funded aid to these former territories (despite having already made them far wealthier and more successful). The West opened its borders, a kind of reverse colonization, providing welfare and thus remittances, while extending to these newcomers and their families not only the full franchise but preferential legal and financial treatment over the native citizenry. The neoliberal experiment, at its core, has been a long self-punishment of the places and peoples that built the modern world.” (X, January 4, 2026)
[6] A promotional poster for the Department of Homeland Security features a historical painting titled “American Progress” from 1872, in which the larger-than-life Lady Columbia – a mythological female personification of the American spirit of adventure, dressed in white – strides across the prairie; settlers, railroads, and covered wagons advance alongside her, while Indigenous peoples retreat before her. A somewhat more modern motif depicts a cowboy riding across the prairie while a stealth bomber flies overhead. A third depicts Uncle Sam at a crossroads between “Invasion and Civilizational Decline” and “Law & Order & Homeland” under the headline “Which Way, Western Man?” – an allusion to the title of a classic book in the “white supremacist” genre.
[7] For the following section, see also “The US Secretary of State visits Central America: ‘America first!’ in the backyard,” GegenStandpunkt 2-25.
[8] “The Trump administration has reached agreements with several Latin American nations for them to serve as stopover locations or destinations for deported migrants... U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio struck deals with El Salvador and Guatemala, both of which agreed to accept deportation flights of their own citizens in addition to other nationalities. Brazil, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Honduras, India, Mexico, and Panama have also agreed to receive or have already received U.S. deportation flights. So too has Venezuela...Meanwhile, a few hundred migrants – most Venezuelan – have cycled through the U.S. naval base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba...” (pbs.org, April 13, 2025)
[9] In early 2026, Panama’s President Mulino announced that his country’s crisis with the United States had been resolved, thereby preempting a ruling by his country’s Supreme Court, which – following Trump’s threat the previous year – had declared unconstitutional the port operation concessions awarded to the Panama Ports Company – 90% of whose shares are held by Hong Kong-based CK Hutchison Holdings, with the Panamanian government holding 10% – unconstitutional. The ruling thwarts CK Hutchison’s attempt to sell its stake to a consortium led by the U.S. asset manager BlackRock and the shipping company MSC; it thereby deprives the company of the legal basis for the sale, effectively amounting to expropriation. Mulino assures that the canal will continue to operate normally in the service of global trade. As an interim solution, the Danish logistics company AP Moller-Maersk is to manage the ports; plans include a new tender for the concession or direct negotiations with the BlackRock/MSC consortium, which are intended to safeguard U.S. security interests and improve the financial terms for the Panamanian government. Meanwhile, CK Hutchison has threatened the Danes with legal action should they agree to this interim solution and has initiated arbitration proceedings against Panama.
[10] “Now, Therefore, I, Donald J. Trump, President of the United States of America, find that the scope and gravity of the recent policies, practices, and actions of the Government of Brazil constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat, which has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States, to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States and hereby declare a national emergency with respect to that threat. To deal with the national emergency declared in this order, I determine that it is necessary and appropriate to impose an additional ad valorem duty rate of 40 percent on certain products of Brazil, as detailed below. In my judgment, this action is necessary and appropriate to deal with the national emergency declared in this order.” (Executive Order 14323)
[11] See the article “MAGA in Argentina” in this issue.[untranslated]
[12] See “Venezuela: The Decline of ‘Bolivarian Socialism’ and its Reasons” in GegenStandpunkt 2-18 and “Trump’s Latin America and the Troika of Tyranny” in GegenStandpunkt 2-19.
[13] The Trump administration estimates that each ship carries enough drugs to kill 25,000 people and consequently classifies these shipments as weapons of mass destruction, the “use” of which justifies and necessitates preemptive military strikes.
[14] “Mr. Miller told officials that if the United States and Venezuela were at war, the Trump administration could again invoke the Alien Enemies Act, an 18th-century law, to expedite deportations of hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans the administration stripped of temporary protected status. He and Mr. Rubio had used it earlier in the year to summarily deport hundreds of Venezuelans to a notorious prison in El Salvador, only to be stopped by court rulings... Courts soon ruled that illegal immigration does not count as the kind of invasion that justifies using the wartime deportation law. But Mr. Miller later talked about reviving the use of the Alien Enemies Act if the United States were in an actual war with Venezuela, a former U.S. official said.” (New York Times, January 3, 2026)
[15] In 2007, Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez fundamentally changed the terms of participation for foreign oil companies in the Orinoco Heavy Oil Belt, requiring them to contribute their ownership rights to joint ventures with PDVSA (Petróleos de Venezuela S.A.), in which the Venezuelan government holds at least a 60% stake. Companies that did not accept these terms were expropriated. As a result, several affected companies – including ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips – filed claims with the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID); the arbitral tribunal imposed compensation payments amounting to billions of dollars on Venezuela in various rulings between 2014 and 2019 (including approximately $1.6 billion in favor of ExxonMobil and approximately $8.7 billion in favor of ConocoPhillips, each subject to subsequent adjustments through set-offs and interest). After years of legal wrangling, the Venezuelan government has made only partial compensation payments—which reveals the fundamental problem for the Trump administration: The U.S. has made the property claims of American champions contingent on the whims of international courts, rather than enforcing its rights of disposal through its own authority. Such lapses in strength will no longer be tolerated.
[16] “We are a respected country again, maybe like never before. These highly trade warriors operating in collaboration with U.S. law enforcement caught them in a very ready position. They were waiting for us. They knew we had many ships out in the sea. We were just sort of waiting. They knew we were coming. So they were in what’s called a ready position, but they were completely overwhelmed and very quickly incapacitated. If you would have seen what I saw last night, you would have been very impressed. I’m not sure that you’ll ever get to see it, but it was an incredible thing to see. Not a single American service member was killed, and not a single piece of American equipment was lost.... The United States military is the strongest and most fierce military on the planet by far. With capabilities and skills, our enemies can scarcely begin to imagine.” (Trump, Press Conference, January 3, 2026)
[17] “This was not an action that required congressional approval. In fact, it couldn't require congressional approval because this was not an invasion. This was not an extended military operation. This was a very precise operation that involved a couple of hours of action...This was not an attack on Venezuela. This was a law enforcement function to capture an indicted drug trafficker. And of course we needed the Department of War to support it...” (Rubio in an NBC interview, January 4, 1926)
[18] “Perhaps the most shocking moment in Trump’s Saturday news conference at Mar-a-Lago was the president’s dismissal of María Corina Machado. The Nobel Peace laureate is credited with masterminding the campaign of opposition candidate Edmundo González, who is regarded as the winner of last year’s election – a result Maduro refused to recognize. The US government has consistently said that González is the rightful president of Venezuela. Many people assumed that any US ouster of Maduro would swiftly lead to González’s installation as president. But Trump said Machado ‘doesn’t have the support within or the respect within the country. She’s a very nice woman, but she doesn’t have the respect.’ … Rubio, who has long supported Machado and democratic movements across Latin America, tried to square a politically uncomfortable circle. ‘There has to be a little realism here,’ he told CBS. ‘They’ve had this regime … in place for 15 or 16 years and everyone’s asking why 24 hours after Nicolás Maduro was arrested there isn’t an election scheduled for tomorrow. That’s absurd,’ Rubio said. Rubio argued that ‘these things take time’ and that while he hoped to see Venezuela transition to a democracy, US national interests were the immediate concern.” (CNN, January 5, 2026)
[19] “According to the Financial Times, the contract [for the $50 million sale] was awarded to the commodities traders Vitol and Trafigura... Both companies are expected to resell the crude oil to their customers, with a large portion going to buyers in the U.S. According to the FT, Vitol’s U.S. chief, John Addison, had attended a high-level meeting with Trump at the White House a few days before the contract was signed and had previously donated more than $6 million to campaign organizations close to Trump. Vitol emphasizes that the donations were made privately and rejects any conflict of interest.” (Handelsblatt, January 16, 2026)
[20] “Trump also laughed off the billions that Exxon Mobil and ConocoPhillips are owed for the assets seized by the Venezuelan regime decades ago. ‘Nice write-off,’ he quipped. ‘You’ll get a lot of your money back,’ Trump told ConocoPhillips CEO Ryan Lance. ‘We’re going to start with an even plate, though – we’re not going to look at what people lost in the past because that was their fault.” (Politico, January 9, 2026)
[21] “Right now, the administration is collaborating closely with the remnants of the Maduro regime under the leadership of interim President Delcy Rodriguez. The problem is that the U.S. does not officially recognize the government that Rodriguez is leading. President Donald Trump during his first term recognized the opposition-led National Assembly elected in 2015 as the only legitimate representative of the Venezuelan people... ‘You have to recognize a government, but we don’t recognize this government,’ the secretary of State said. ‘We recognize the 2015 National Assembly, so we have to find some creative way legally to meet that standard.’” (CNBC, February 11, 2026)
[22] “In his remarks to the press in the Oval Office, Trump stated that he had discussed an agreement on drug trafficking with Petro, but did not provide any details. ‘We’re working on it.’ Petro used the meeting at the White House to present his achievements to Trump. As an example, Petro cited a joint operation by the Colombian Navy and the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) in which 15 tons of cocaine were recently seized and a smuggling submarine was intercepted within two days... Petro said that Trump had proposed a joint military operation by Colombia and Venezuela against organized crime in the border region.” (FAZ, February 4, 2026)
[23] The kidnapping of Maduro has “clearly rattled Mexico’s President Claudia Sheinbaum. She started her daily morning press conference on Monday reading from a document that detailed Mexico’s position on Venezuela.‘We categorically reject intervention in the internal affairs of other countries,’ she said. ‘The history of Latin America is clear and compelling: intervention has never brought democracy, never generated well-being, nor lasting stability.’ Sheinbaum’s comments rank among her sharpest criticisms of Washington since Trump took office and are among the strongest rebukes in the region of Maduro’s ouster... But behind the scenes, Mexico City is likely to move even closer to Washington in the wake of the Venezuela attack, hoping that increasingly tight bilateral security cooperation will stave off U.S. aggressions, Mexican officials and security analysts said. ‘Increasing joint security cooperation and strengthening Mexico's own fight against the cartels will be key to avoiding unilateral U.S. military intervention,’ said a Mexican security official who spoke on condition of anonymity. Security analysts say the attack on Venezuela significantly elevated the stakes for Mexico City by signaling just how far Trump is willing to go to assert U.S. dominance in Latin America.” (Reuters, January 6, 2026)
“U.S. officials want American forces – either Special Operation troops or C.I.A. officers – to accompany Mexican soldiers on raids on suspected fentanyl labs ... Such joint operations would be a significant expansion of the United States’ role in Mexico, and one that the Mexican government has so far adamantly opposed. The country’s president, Claudia Sheinbaum, has repeatedly said that the two nations would work together to fight the cartels but that her government rejected the U.S.’s proposal of sending American troops across the border.” (New York Times, January 16, 2026)
[24] “There are several reasons why the current U.S. administration no longer mentions Nicaragua in the same breath as Venezuela and Cuba. For one thing, the Ortega-Murillo couple – who are usually confrontational—have been unusually cooperative in recent weeks. One example is the surprising reintroduction of visa requirements for Cuban citizens. For years, Nicaragua served as a bridgehead for migrants from the Caribbean and other regions of the world who wanted to reach the U.S. by land. In 2023 alone, at least 100,000 passengers from Haiti and Cuba arrived in Nicaragua on charter flights, which facilitated their onward journey. There are also indications of selective cooperation in the fight against drug trafficking... Given this willingness to cooperate, other demands may fall by the wayside in the U.S....Furthermore, Nicaragua carries less political and economic weight for Washington than Venezuela or Cuba, making it a less attractive target. The Central American country, with a population of around seven million, lacks significant natural resources such as Venezuela’s oil, gold, and other mineral deposits. It also lacks a strategic asset such as the Panama Canal, which is indispensable for global trade. Plans for a Nicaragua Canal – partly with Chinese involvement – have been discussed time and again, but never realized... Influential politicians with Cuban roots, such as Secretary of State Marco Rubio, do denounce the conditions in Nicaragua. However, the overthrow of the regime there would not carry the symbolic and strategic significance of a regime change in Cuba—or of the control already gained over Venezuelan oil.” (FAZ, February 13, 2026)
[25] “Nobody’s going to fight the United States militarily over the future of Greenland … The real question is, by what right does Denmark assert control over Greenland? What is the basis of their territorial claim? What is their basis of having Greenland as a colony of Denmark? The United States is the power of NATO ... Obviously, Greenland should be part of the United States...There’s no need to even think or talk about this in the context that you're asking of a military operation. Nobody's going to fight the United States militarily over the future of Greenland.” (Stephen Miller in a CNN interview, January 5, 2026)
[26] The White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller put it most clearly: “We live in a world in which you can talk all you want about international niceties and everything else, but we live in a world, in the real world, Jake, that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power. These are the iron laws of the world that have existed since the beginning of time.” (CNN interview, January 5, 2026)
[27] According to reports, such an agreement could include: increased military and financial contributions from NATO allies in the Arctic; the ability to expand the U.S. military presence on the island at will, including for the purpose of establishing the famous “Golden Dome” missile defense system; a say for the U.S. in investment projects by other countries on the island; and perhaps even full U.S. sovereignty over U.S. military bases on the island.
[28] Rubio explicitly identifies the strictness of border controls as a decisive criterion for governance in Europe that is in accordance with international law – and thus humane:
“We must also gain control of our national borders, controlling who and how many people enter our countries. This is not an expression of xenophobia. It is not hate. It is a fundamental act of national sovereignty. And the failure to do so is not just an abdication of one of our most basic duties owed to our people. It is an urgent threat to the fabric of our societies and the survival of our civilization itself.”
On the one hand—as far as the “details” of actual policy are concerned – Rubio is preaching to the choir with this demand among all European audiences. As for the populist spirit of this policy – which Rubio views as the “fundamental” aspect – he is thereby clearly championing the parties that see precisely this as an irreconcilable difference from the European “establishment.”