Analysis of: Dictator ousted but regime intact – what next for Venezuela’s opposition?
The Guardian | January 18, 2026
The situation in Venezuela reveals a stark contradiction at the heart of US foreign policy: Washington has removed Nicolás Maduro while deliberately preserving the entire state apparatus that enforced his rule. This strategic choice becomes comprehensible only when viewed through the lens of material interests—specifically, control over Venezuela's vast oil reserves, the largest proven reserves on Earth. The article documents how armed militias continue patrolling streets, political prisoners remain incarcerated, and the feared interior minister Diosdado Cabello retains power—all under supposed 'White House oversight.' This arrangement serves US capital far more effectively than genuine democratization would. A stable extraction regime operated by experienced administrators who now answer to Washington provides predictable oil access without the messy uncertainties of actual democratic governance. The exile of Venezuelan civil society leaders and the systematic dismantling of independent organizations over two decades have conveniently eliminated potential resistance to this neo-colonial arrangement. What emerges is not liberation but rather a transition from one form of authoritarian control to another—from Chavismo to direct imperial management wearing a thin democratic mask. The Venezuelan people, whose documented 2024 electoral victory remains unrecognized, find themselves caught between a domestic ruling class that built its power through state control of oil rents and an imperial power primarily interested in redirecting those same petroleum flows. Trump's dismissive claim that Venezuelans 'wouldn't even know how to have an election' reveals the ideological work being performed: framing the colonized as incapable of self-governance to justify continued external control over their resources.
Class Dynamics
Actors: Venezuelan Chavista state bureaucracy (Rodríguez siblings, Cabello), US state apparatus (Trump administration, CIA), Venezuelan working class and popular sectors, Venezuelan opposition political class (González, Machado), Civil society organizations and activists, Armed paramilitary forces (colectivos), International oil capital
Beneficiaries: US oil corporations gaining access to Venezuelan reserves, Venezuelan state bureaucrats maintaining positions under new arrangement, Trump administration achieving geopolitical victory, US national security apparatus expanding regional control
Harmed Parties: Venezuelan working class facing continued repression, Political prisoners still detained, Exiled activists unable to return, Venezuelan voters whose 2024 choice remains unimplemented, Independent civil society organizations
Power has shifted from domestic authoritarian control to a hybrid arrangement where the Venezuelan state bureaucracy retains internal coercive capacity while ceding sovereignty over oil resources to US imperialism. The opposition political class, despite winning the 2024 election, has been sidelined by both forces. The working class remains subordinated, their brief hope for democratic change channeled into neither genuine self-determination nor even bourgeois democratic representation, but into a new configuration of elite control.
Material Conditions
Economic Factors: Venezuelan oil reserves (largest proven reserves globally), US energy security interests, Economic sanctions and their partial lifting, Potential 'economic recovery' through US-Venezuela normalization, State control over oil rents as basis of Chavista power
Venezuela's political economy has long been structured around state capture of petroleum rents, creating a bureaucratic class whose power derives not from productive ownership but from control over distribution of oil revenues. The US intervention reorganizes these relations by inserting American capital as the ultimate beneficiary of extraction while maintaining the existing administrative apparatus. This represents a shift from national-developmentalist to neo-colonial extraction relations without fundamentally altering domestic class structures.
Resources at Stake: Venezuelan petroleum reserves, PDVSA (state oil company) infrastructure, Geostrategic position in Caribbean/South America, Regional political influence
Historical Context
Precedents: US interventions in Guatemala (1954), Chile (1973), Panama (1989), Iraq regime change followed by technocratic management, Libyan intervention leaving state apparatus fragmented, Earlier US support for Venezuelan coup attempt (2002)
This intervention follows the classic pattern of US imperialism in resource-rich nations: regime change justified through humanitarian or democratic rhetoric while preserving structures useful for extraction. The novel element—keeping Maduro's entire cabinet—reflects lessons learned from Iraq, where dismantling the state apparatus created instability harmful to resource extraction. We see late-stage imperial pragmatism: democracy talk for legitimation, authoritarian continuity for stability, all serving capital accumulation through resource control.
Contradictions
Primary: The US claims to support Venezuelan democracy while actively preventing the democratic outcome (González's installation or new elections) that would threaten stable oil extraction arrangements.
Secondary: The Chavista bureaucracy must serve US interests to survive while their legitimacy derived from anti-imperialist nationalism, Venezuelan opposition achieved electoral victory but lacks power to implement it, Civil society demands democracy but US 'liberation' delivers new form of domination, Economic recovery requires US cooperation, which requires accepting non-democratic arrangement
These contradictions may intensify as the Chavista-US arrangement proves unstable—the bureaucracy cannot indefinitely maintain legitimacy while serving foreign interests. Popular frustration could generate renewed mobilization. Alternatively, sufficient economic improvement through oil revenue sharing might temporarily stabilize the arrangement. The opposition faces a choice between accepting gradual reform within US-managed parameters or building independent working-class power capable of challenging both the domestic bureaucracy and imperial control.
Global Interconnections
Venezuela represents a critical node in the global competition for energy resources and regional hegemony. US control over Venezuelan oil strengthens Washington's position against China and Russia, both of whom had cultivated relationships with Caracas. This intervention signals to other left-nationalist governments in the region (Bolivia, potentially Brazil) that resource nationalism will face aggressive response. It also demonstrates the limits of Chavismo's model: anti-imperialist rhetoric without genuine working-class power ultimately proved vulnerable to imperial pressure when economic crisis weakened the state. The pattern connects to broader dynamics of US reassertion in its traditional sphere of influence, reversing the 'pink tide' gains of the early 2000s. Climate transition makes Venezuelan heavy crude somewhat less strategically vital long-term, but current energy markets and the imperative to deny resources to rivals maintains its importance. The intervention also serves domestic US political purposes, allowing Trump to claim victory against 'socialism' while actually preserving the state structures Chavismo built.
Conclusion
Venezuela's situation reveals that genuine liberation requires more than changing which elites control the state—it requires transforming the material basis of class power. The Venezuelan working class, having endured both Chavista authoritarianism and now imperial 'oversight,' faces the challenge of building independent organizational capacity. The exiled activists' observation that 'Venezuelans know how to manage hope' points toward resilience, but hope must be organized into material power. The contradictions between US democratic rhetoric and anti-democratic practice, between the Chavista bureaucracy's survival needs and its nationalist legitimacy, create openings—but only if popular forces can develop autonomous organization capable of advancing their interests against both domestic and imperial ruling classes.
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: 92%