SUMMARY: Our aim is to have friends or allies. But barring that, America’s interest is in having stable and non-hostile powers on the world stage.
In the immediate aftermath of the invasion of Venezuela, many liberal friends of mine were adamant this for one reason, oil. No, that’s not the case. Oil is areason we have an interest in that country, as well as narcotics and other issues. I’ll cover those later in this article.
First we need to take a big picture at what is in the interest of America. What does the United States need in the world? We need access to resources and markets, we need to keep our adversaries at bay, and as such we need other nations assistance. That is, we need friends and allies.
A friend is another nation who’s aligned geo-politically, economically and culturally to us (e.g., the United Kingdom, Israel). Also we have multiple allies in the world, such as Saudi Arabia. While we may have different types of societies or government but our critical political and economic interests align. The greatest example of this was the Allies allying with the Soviet Union during World War II against the Axis powers.
What if we don’t have friends or allies in a certain region? We need, to coin a phrase, Stable Non-Hostile Nations. Their interest may not fully align with ours, but they are not opposing ours. They also are stable enough they don’t interfere with American interests in the region.
A current example would be Indonesia. While not a formal ally of the West, we have similar interest against Chinese aggression and free trade. Or Cameroon, with a stable enough government to keep disruptions from overflowing to nearby countries. Another recent example is Israel and Egypt. Very different nations, but as a result of the Camp David accords, both were not hostile to each other.
A example of a Stable Non-hostile Nation is Libya. In the aftermath of the 2003 overthrow of Saddam Hussein, Muammar Qaddafi had an epiphany. It’s better to not be in the cross hairs of the United States. Qaddafi gave up his WMD programs, settled multiple lawsuits over the Pan Am 103 bombing, and stopped supporting terrorist groups in the Middle East and Europe. He also shared intelligence with western nations.
In exchange we agreed to let him live. We would stop our efforts to force regime change as long as he kept his country secure and caused no other trouble. Easy, accomplished multiple goals of the US, and cheap. Of course we can’t leave well enough alone.
In one of the greatest disasters of the Obama years, in 2011 the administration attacked Libyan targets, destabilizing the Qaddafi regime. Qaddafi’s convoy was attacked by US forces, and he was killed by rebel forces.
Qaddafi was not an ally of the west, but he had changed from being an advisory to a non-hostile regime. Looking at the totality of the circumstances, that was the best we can hope for. We didn’t need to act against Qaddafi, just keep an eye on him. Trust, but verify.
Again, Qaddafi was not a nice person. We’re not interested in “nice,” we’re interested in America’s national concerns. When we can’t have allied nations, we’ll work with nations that are not working against our interests, and stable so we don’t worry about them affecting other countries in the region.
With that as context, let’s look at South America again. Venezuela is definitely in America’s area of interest, like every other country in the western hemisphere. We do not want nations aligning with our adversaries. In the case of Caracas, the Maduro government was very aligned with four of our greatest competitors: Russia, China, Iran and Cuba.
It’s in our national interest to weaken these nations? Absolutely. The weaker they are, the less likely they will engage or compete with us. How do we do that? Isolation, from allies and resources.
How did the end of the Maduro regime affect these nations. Cuba just lost over 31,000 barrels per day (BPD) of crude oil and its derivatives. In the past Venezuela shipped as much as 51,000 BPD, resources Cuba is addicted to. Even before this cut off, Cubans were struggling with power generation, with planned and unplanned power outages common on the island.
Russia has sold multiple weapons system to the Venezuelan government, including many air defense systems. A steady income for the Putin regime, generating cash for his adventures in places like the Ukraine. The Kremlin just lost a reliable paycheck.
China is expanding and hungry, and Venezuela has resources. Prior to last week, China imported 470,000 BPD from Venezuela, approximately 4.5 percent of its seaborn crude. But oil is not Beijing’s only interest.
Venezuela has over 300,000 metric tons of rare earth minerals (e.g., cassiterite, coltan, cerium and lanthanum). China has a large hold of the world market on these minerals, and each advanced nation wants more of them. Beijing is also, like black market oil shipments, importing rare earth minerals from Venezuela under the table. Both supplies has been blocked for the foreseeable future.
Worst off is Iran. After four years of crippling sanctions and trade cut offs in Trump I, Iran was on its knees. Within days of becoming president, Joe O’Biden relieved Tehran of these sanctions and unfroze billions in Iranian assets. Tehran was selling Venezuela weapons systems (e.g., drones and short-range missiles systems), generating cash for the mullahs. Since January 2025, Iran has been put under sanctions and has the greatest open rebellion against the mullahs since 1979.
With the disposing of the Maduro regime, what can be expected. To be honest, we cannot expect Caracas to be (at least initially) friendly to us, nor an ally of the United States. However, with a less corrupt government, a functioning oil industry and the supporting industries, Venezuela will be stable. A stable nation where millions do not rush to America’s borders or disrupt near by countries with refugees. A stable government not allowing our greatest adversaries access to critical resources, perhaps allowing western companies to handle their extraction. In other words, a Stable Non-Hostile Nation in what was arguably the most unstable country in South America.
So has Trump’s incursion into Venezuela been in America’s best interest? Unquestionable so. We have just given the Venezuelan government reason to not allow drug shipments through its ports so easily. Four of our greatest advisories have been cut off from cash, oil and other minerals. And with any luck, fewer Venezuelan nationals will be heading north, further exacerbating our issues with illegal immigration. It also reaffirms the Monroe Doctrine, we are the preeminent power in the Western Hemisphere. The US must insure no one questions that.
Let’s look at another land issue from the administration. President Trump has been very open about controlling Greenland, as a territory or by treaty.What does that allow us to do?
Source: Facebook
First, it’s not about the land. Controlling Greenland prevents Russia and China from access to northern water routes and Arctic rare minerals. As one person put it on Facebook, ”Whoever controls Greenland controls the high ground of the next century.” It’s close to the western hemisphere, and multiple allied nations. Securing it would provide the West the closest land platform for exploiting these assets and securing sea routes in the north. Definitely in the interest of the West in general, and the US in particular, if we can secure this as a base.
Cutting off our adversaries from critical resources in the West and not allowing them to use these nearby nations as a base to threaten us. Changing volatile adversaries to Stable Non-Hostile countries so we can obtain resources we need and focus our power on other threats. Looking at Venezuela and Greenland, may I say, Trump might just have a method to his madness.
