Image by Basma Alghali.
I believe that countries in the Global South are in an abusive relationship with the United States. We don’t want to be in this domineering cycle of abuse but unfortunately the US government will never cease in its ambition to control our lives and resources, which forces us to endlessly resist its aggression.
Through personal experience I’ve come to recognize patterns of manipulation and coercion and how these are reflected in the wider dynamics of imperialism. More importantly, I am acutely aware of the role played by the enablers who contribute to the perpetuation and escalation of these abuses. US foreign policy cannot exist without the mainstream media peddling it.
An abusive relationship often develops through a series of distinct stages, starting with subtle manipulation by lavishing excessive (conditioned) kindness and attention on the victim. A notable example is the way Washington has been grooming Guyana since the discovery of significant oil deposits in the disputed Essequibo region.
However, the initial charms eventually wear off, especially when the victim becomes uncooperative as was the case in Venezuela when Hugo Chávez came to power in 1998, with a sovereign anti-imperialist project that led to oil nationalization a few years later. With this shift, the US initiated the phases of manipulation, interference, isolation, intimidation and violence—experiences that many countries in the Global South know all too well.
Explaining the full scope of the US abusive tactics against Venezuela would require more than a single article, but to provide a broad overview, we can summarize them as follows:
1) The US has lobbied or coerced governments and multinational organizations into adopting hostile positions against Venezuela. This includes accusing the Venezuelan government of human rights abuses and trying to isolate Caracas in multilateral forums. In addition, Washington has threatened secondary sanctions and import tariffs against countries that do business with Venezuela’s oil and gas sector.
2) Abusers often have their loyal minions who carry out some of their dirty work. From Juan Guaidó’s self-proclaimed interim government to mercenary invasion attempts, Washington has politically and financially supported Venezuela’s right-wing sectors’s coup endeavours.
3) Since 2017, the US has imposed sanctions on the oil industry and other state entities, and seized Venezuelan assets abroad, including US-based oil subsidiary CITGO. This blow ignited the country’s economic and migration crisis. These sanctions, which have led to the death of hundreds of thousands, are the most violent outcome of Washington’s regime change operation against the South American country.
3) US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has threatened military action against Venezuela as Washington sides with ExxonMobil and Guyana to exploit the disputed, oil-rich Essequibo Strip. His statement echoed Trump’s 2019 “all options are on the table” comment. The intimidating talk comes alongside the US Southern Command conducting military exercises in the Caribbean, all while the US has placed a $25 million bounty for the arrest of President Nicolás Maduro.
These abuses against Venezuela have only been possible thanks to the mainstream media’s promotion of Washington’s agenda. In many cases it absolves the US of responsibility for its crimes against humanity, in others, it offers justifications and even support for further crimes.
Enabling abuse
Mainstream media has a long history of promoting negative and misleading narratives about Venezuela, often depicting the Chávez and Maduro governments as corrupt and dictatorial. More importantly, the media downplays the impact of US sanctions, largely disconnecting them from the economic and migration crises that the Venezuelan people have endured—even though these sanctions are the main culprits.
No other outlet does the job as well as The New York Times (NYT). For context, let’s reminisce on the NYT past hits advocating for US military intervention, sanctions, coups and more against countries labeled enemies of the US: “Should the US Intervene in Libya?” (2011), “Bomb Syria, Even if It Is Illegal” (2013), “Stronger Sanctions on Russia, at Last” (2014) and “We Absolutely Need to Escalate in Iran” (2024).
The newest gem to add to this decades-long collection is an article titled “Depose Maduro” written by NYT columnist Bret Stephens and published in January. The piece provides a perfect example of how the media enables Washington’s abusive foreign policy.
Ironically, the article in question advocates for “democracy” while advocating for undemocratic methods. It begins by stating that Maduro should be overthrown “through coercive diplomacy or force if necessary.” Stephens presents this proposal as “morally right” based on what can only be seen as colonial standards, and disregards the “lives lost” from a hypothetical military invasion as long as it overthrows Venezuela’s protagonistic and participatory democracy.
It is difficult to see a truly democratic outcome from such a scenario, especially when US political and military interventions in Latin America have historically propped up fascist dictators who served as US allies in the region, with Rafael Trujillo in the Dominican Republic, the Somoza family in Nicaragua and Augusto Pinochet in Chile being just a few examples.
Stephens even attempts to draw parallels between Venezuela and Panama, praising the 1989 US invasion as a success, conveniently omitting the thousands of unaccounted deaths, the thousands of displaced families and the long-term effects on the country’s economy and sovereignty. Not to mention that Manuel Noriega was on the CIA’s payroll until he no longer conformed to US interests.
The NYT article goes on to repeat the typical falsehoods about Venezuela to justify an invasion, claiming that this would put an end to “a criminal regime that is a source of drugs,” perpetuating the unsubstantiated accusation that the government is tied to drug trafficking. Not only has there never been any evidence to support this accusation, but the US has a long history of using allegations of drug trafficking as a tool for political leverage, particularly against governments that challenge Washington’s foreign policy interests.
But when it comes to lies and half-truths, these statements are particularly disturbing: “Nearly eight million Venezuelans have fled the country since Maduro took power [and] millions are suffering from malnutrition,” meanwhile “punitive” economic sanctions imposed during the first Trump administration “didn’t work,” according to Stephens, pointing to Maduro’s continued rule as proof.
These claims overlook the main culprit: US unilateral coercive measures, commonly known as sanctions, and their devastating consequences.
While it is true that some seven million Venezuelans have migrated over the past decade (according to UN estimates), the flow began to grow in 2017, coinciding with the introduction of the first US sanctions, which led to a dramatic drop in oil revenues and a severe economic contraction. People fled the very conditions created by the US economic siege, with many migrating to the US itself, only to be later criminalized and forcibly expelled.
For the NYT columnist, these tragedies are merely collateral damage. Moreover, he employs a classic DARVO (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender) tactic by claiming that these dire circumstances are solely the result of the Maduro government’s actions, thus proposing the final stage of abuse: a military invasion.
A military invasion appears unlikely as the Trump administration seems to be pursuing a repeat of its 2017-2020 “maximum pressure” campaign. Recently, Washington revoked permits that allowed several foreign companies to operate in Venezuela’s oil sector, a move that will ultimately have significant repercussions for the Venezuelan people.
Finally, the NYT article concludes with a question whose obvious answer is conveniently ignored by its writer: “How much more suffering should Venezuelans endure?” Ending US sanctions, halting support for violent coup attempts and not encouraging invasions would undoubtedly alleviate much of that suffering.
Despite ongoing economic challenges and military threats, Venezuela has vowed to continue to recover from its downturn and is advancing its sovereign project. A key aspect of this resistance is the understanding that criminal empires are never to be trusted and that true power and liberation lie in the hands of the people.
