Analysis of: Trump taking ‘drill, baby, drill’ plan to Venezuela ‘terrible’ for climate, experts warn
The Guardian | January 6, 2026
The Trump administration's dramatic seizure of Venezuelan leadership and subsequent plans to exploit the nation's vast oil reserves represents a stark example of resource imperialism in the 21st century. This action strips away the ideological veneer typically used to justify US intervention, revealing the naked pursuit of material resources that has historically driven imperial expansion. The explicit language—'we are going to take back the oil'—marks a departure from even the pretense of humanitarian justification, openly acknowledging the extraction of wealth from the Global South. The class dimensions of this intervention are unmistakable. US oil majors like Chevron and ExxonMobil stand to gain access to 300 billion barrels of proven reserves, while the administration pressures Venezuela's interim government to eliminate laws requiring 50% state ownership of oil projects. This represents a direct transfer of collectively-held resources to private capital, financed by billions in public support while profits flow to shareholders. Meanwhile, the environmental costs—an additional 550 million tons of CO2 annually from even modest production increases—will be borne disproportionately by working people globally through climate disasters, while Venezuelan workers face the prospect of their national wealth being extracted by foreign corporations. The contradictions embedded in this situation are profound. Oil companies face a classic capitalist dilemma: the potential for enormous profits versus political instability that extends far beyond Trump's remaining term. The intervention itself creates the conditions for prolonged resistance that could make investment untenable. Most fundamentally, the short-term accumulation logic driving this seizure accelerates climate breakdown that threatens the material basis of all economic activity—a contradiction capitalism proves structurally incapable of resolving.
Class Dynamics
Actors: US oil corporations (Chevron, ExxonMobil), US state apparatus (Trump administration), Venezuelan state/Maduro government, Venezuelan working class, US working class/taxpayers, Global working class affected by climate change, International capital investors
Beneficiaries: US oil majors gaining access to reserves, Shareholders of energy corporations, US Gulf Coast refinery operators, Financial institutions backing extraction projects
Harmed Parties: Venezuelan people losing national resources, Venezuelan workers under foreign corporate control, US domestic oil producers facing competition, Global populations facing accelerated climate change, US taxpayers subsidizing corporate extraction
The situation demonstrates the state functioning as an instrument of capital accumulation, with military force deployed to secure access to resources for private corporations. The explicit demand to eliminate Venezuela's 50% state ownership requirement reveals the subordination of national sovereignty to corporate interests. The Venezuelan people, nominally sovereign over their resources, are rendered powerless as decisions about their national wealth are made in Washington boardrooms.
Material Conditions
Economic Factors: 300 billion barrels of proven oil reserves—world's largest, $110 billion investment required to restore peak production, Lower extraction costs than US Permian Basin, Heavy crude suitable for Gulf Coast refinery infrastructure, US government financial support for drilling operations
The intervention seeks to transform Venezuela's partially nationalized oil industry into a site of direct foreign capital exploitation. The demand to eliminate 50% state ownership requirements would shift surplus value extraction from a mixed model (where some revenue supported Venezuelan social programs) to one where profits flow primarily to US shareholders. Workers would remain as labor power to be exploited, but the social wage previously funded by state oil revenue would be eliminated.
Resources at Stake: 300 billion barrels of crude oil reserves, Existing petroleum infrastructure requiring rehabilitation, Orinoco Belt heavy crude deposits, Medium crude reserves more easily accessible, Venezuelan labor power for extraction operations
Historical Context
Precedents: 1953 CIA coup in Iran protecting Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, United Fruit Company-backed interventions in Guatemala, 2003 Iraq invasion and subsequent oil privatization, Historic US interventions throughout Latin America, 19th century gunboat diplomacy securing resource access
This intervention fits within the centuries-long pattern of core capitalist nations extracting resources from the periphery through direct and indirect coercion. What distinguishes this moment is the abandonment of ideological justification—no 'spreading democracy' or 'fighting terrorism.' The explicit acknowledgment that 'we are going to take back the oil' represents either unprecedented candor or a shift in hegemonic legitimation strategies, where naked resource extraction no longer requires moral cover for domestic audiences.
Contradictions
Primary: The fundamental contradiction between short-term capital accumulation (oil extraction profits) and the long-term destruction of the material basis for human civilization (climate catastrophe) cannot be resolved within the existing system. Each barrel extracted generates profit while accelerating conditions that will devastate economic activity globally.
Secondary: Political instability created by the intervention undermines the investment security capital requires, Increased Venezuelan production undercuts US domestic producers who supported sanctions, Three-year presidential term versus decade-long investment horizons creates hesitancy, Rhetoric of 'liberation' contradicts explicit resource extraction goals, US taxpayer subsidies for corporate profits versus public interest
These contradictions are unlikely to resolve favorably for capital. Political resistance in Venezuela will likely intensify, creating the instability that deters long-term investment. Climate impacts will accelerate regardless, creating cascading crises. The most probable outcome is partial extraction generating windfall profits for some firms while leaving fundamental contradictions—and Venezuela's infrastructure—in worse condition than before.
Global Interconnections
This intervention illuminates the structural relationship between fossil capital and the state in late-stage capitalism. As easily accessible oil depletes and climate breakdown accelerates, we witness increasingly desperate and overt measures to secure remaining reserves. The simultaneous threats against Canada and Greenland reveal a pattern: the US state functions as armed enforcer for energy capital's access to global resources, with the 'rules-based international order' abandoned when it conflicts with accumulation imperatives. The climate dimension connects this local intervention to planetary stakes. The additional 550 million tons of annual CO2 from modest production increases—exceeding the UK's total emissions—demonstrates how individual capitalist decisions aggregate into civilizational threats. The experts quoted acknowledge this clearly: expansion would be 'terrible for the climate.' Yet the logic of capital accumulation proceeds regardless, because the costs are externalized to the global commons while profits are privatized. This is the metabolic rift between capitalism and nature made viscerally concrete.
Conclusion
The Venezuela intervention crystallizes the terminal contradictions of fossil capitalism: a system that must expand extraction to survive while that very expansion destroys the ecological conditions for human civilization. For working people globally, the implications are stark. The Venezuelan working class faces direct expropriation of national wealth; US workers subsidize corporate profits through taxes while bearing climate costs; workers worldwide face accelerated environmental collapse. The explicit abandonment of democratic or humanitarian pretexts signals a new phase where capital's demands are enforced through naked power. This clarification, while ominous, may also be clarifying—making visible the class interests that previous ideological frameworks obscured, and potentially creating conditions for international working-class solidarity against both fossil capital and the climate catastrophe it accelerates.
Editorial Note: This analysis applies a dialectical materialist framework to news events. It represents one interpretive perspective and should not be considered objective reporting.
AI-Assisted Analysis | Confidence: 93%