Transcription
Hello everyone, a very warm welcome to another geopolitics video on this channel. I am currently in Africa. I am here to record another series of videos, currently in Western Sahara, this non-autonomous region that is controlled by Morocco. Many videos are being produced here, but I cannot help but give my two cents on the situation happening in Venezuela, what it could represent for the Latin American region and for the world as a whole. The breaches of international law, the hope of the Venezuelan people, all in a very sober analysis, as I always try to do. Obviously, everyone has their preferences, but here I will say what happened and what can happen for both Venezuela and the rest of the world after the precedent set today by President Donald Trump, with his intervention in Caracas, removing them, taking them to the United States, under the custody of the American army and now the American justice, the former Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro. So, stay until the end if you like this type of content. Please support the channel and, if possible, also check out the Remo Fenuti store, which always dresses me so well here on any occasion. Today I'm wearing their blazer too, on the go, traveling from place to place, but always well-dressed for my news segments. So, use my coupon at remofenuts.com.br. Buy clothes from this shirtmaker that has been in the Brazilian market for 40 years, producing in Brazil for Brazilians and delivering throughout the national territory. Stay until the end, you won't regret it. Let's go. In another video on this topic, I already told you that Trump's or the United States' interest in Venezuela has nothing to do with democracy. Perhaps 1%. The three main reasons behind this operation are obvious and were admitted by the American president himself in his press conference given today in Maralago, Florida, where he is now spending his vacation, using it as his office before returning to Washington. The three reasons are very clear. Venezuelan oil, and we will talk about it, why it is so important for the United States, which are still the largest exporters, they are already the largest exporters, but they always want more oil. The second has to do with a geopolitical demonstration of influence, and the third is power, either for the region where it is located or for its enemies on the other side of the world. So, starting with what happened around midnight, from the 2nd to the 3rd, the United States, which already had a series of military aircraft and vessels in the Caribbean Sea, was shooting down several boats, several small boats of Venezuelan drug traffickers during the end of 2025. It carried out an infiltration and extraction operation of the former president, the Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro. Everything was done, according to the American military themselves, with extreme precision and without any casualties. No American soldiers killed, no equipment lost, and so far, we also have no reports of Venezuelan civilians killed in this operation. Everything indicates that it happened in Nicolás Maduro's personal residence, which had its own guards protecting him, but given the great military power of the United States and also this intelligence information, with the CIA having been active there for a long time, it was not so difficult to carry out this extraction. There were some bombings in strategic regions, mainly of the Bolivarian army. But without major incidents, Nicolás Maduro went to the United States. Some photos are already circulating on the internet, including him blindfolded with his hands cuffed, even holding a water bottle, and many others are fake, from artificial intelligence, but for all intents and purposes, he was on board the US warship, the Ivogima, and will now be tried by the American justice system in the state of New York. It is worth remembering that he was already indicted in 2020, during Trump's first term, I think it was before Joe Biden's election, in November of that year. And therefore, in the eyes of Americans, he is a major leader of a drug cartel, the Cartel de Los Soles, which allegedly has Nicolás Maduro as one of its bosses and one of those who profits the most from this activity, which, according to Trump and his ministers, was poisoning American cities, bringing violence and strong chemical dependency caused by drugs. The fact is that Venezuela is not a major producer of cocaine, perhaps it has some refineries, but it has used drugs, like many other narco-states around the world, to keep money within its government. But this was not enough for Trump's intervention to be fully justified, which is why I am only stating these facts, because this is what Trump and the State Department presented as the main reason behind the operation. Obviously, on page two, they already talked about oil. Before talking about oil, I want to tell you that Venezuela was one of the most prosperous nations in South America. Even during the period when many South American countries fell into dictatorships during the Cold War, Brazil, Paraguay, Chile, Argentina, Venezuela remained democratic. It was one of the countries with the longest period of democracy in the 20th century. Hugo Chávez was even democratically elected in the late 1990s, and from that moment on, being a popular and charismatic figure, Hugo Chávez began to poison the institutions from within, by controlling the judiciary, by controlling the legislature, and finally, by ending term limits. He had a health issue, cancer, and died. Maduro inherited this system and continued to carry out these electoral frauds. He prohibited a large part of the main opposition figures from running. Many of them were arrested, the press was persecuted, and the 2024 elections in July were widely fraudulent, according to various international organizations. So, for many purposes, the main democratic nations of the world did not recognize Nicolás Maduro as the head of state of Venezuela. Very well. Beyond that, it is important to mention that the impoverishment of the Venezuelan population, caused by economic measures, by sanctions, but also by the mismanagement and corruption of the Chavista state, led more than 25% of the country to seek exile in other nations, including Brazil itself, the state of Roraima, which has many Venezuelans, as well as Chile, Colombia, Argentina, Mexico, the United States, and Spain. So, it was truly a disastrous government that oppressed its people, leaving them in a state of destitution. So, obviously, they are, in their vast majority, happy. We cannot say that Nicolás Maduro was loved, we know he wasn't. Perhaps loved by a segment of the police, the army, those public officials who earned a lot of money and a lot of protection, while more than 90% of the population lived in poverty. These are even recent data. 90% of Venezuela living in poverty and more than 70% in extreme poverty, with extremely devalued currencies, high inflation, and a minimum wage in the range of $20, $30, something that is impractical anywhere in the world, especially in a country that was once very developed. And we see that in this sense, it is a great relief for Venezuelans, and it is not entirely up to us foreigners. At least I, who have never been to Venezuela, have read extensively about the subject, have interacted with many Venezuelans, but have never been there in person to judge whether it will be the best thing in the world or the worst thing in the world. A large part of the Venezuelans I have spoken with recently are quite relieved, but at the same time worried about the days to come, the days after. What will this mean for Venezuela? Will Venezuela be a success story of a democratic transition after foreign intervention? Or will it be another example of a failed state that was broken by a foreign power and not rebuilt by it, as was Afghanistan, as was Iraq, as has probably happened in several other African countries with interventions from Russia, from the United States, or from France? So, this issue is indeed very complex and has greater importance for Brazilians as it is a neighboring country. Venezuela shares more than 2,000 kilometers of border with Brazil. The state of Roraima was also one of the states that welcomed the most Venezuelans during the refugee crisis in recent years, and it also involves sensitive national security issues. Therefore, what will be done there, what will be carried out, can also have an impact on Brazil, especially in the northern region, in addition to the political impact it may have on the 2026 elections, which are only 10 months away, but there is always this issue of Venezuela, Latin American dictatorships, and international geopolitical alignment as a central point in debates and even in the platform presented by candidates from the left and the right regarding what a future government would be like or will be like. Returning to the main issue of this US intervention, we have oil. Venezuela is the country with the largest proven oil reserves in the world. It is a very heavy oil, it requires a lot of technology to refine, but it is abundant. And the United States has this technology. Venezuelan oil was nationalized even before Chávez, but we know that there were many disputes that prevented more American companies holding this technology from accessing the oil fields in Venezuela and being able to export them to the rest of the world and especially to the United States, which is one of the largest consumers of black gold. In this sense, obviously, the United States has an interest in this. After all, heavy oil is also used to make asphalt. And the largest producers of heavy oil that were close to the United States, and still are, are Russia and Mexico. Both are currently facing economic difficulties, or at least have very bad relations. Russia due to the war in Ukraine, and Mexico due to tariffs. President Claudia Sheinbaum, no matter how much she has resisted these attacks from Trump, these tariffs, and even some border interventions with pride, she cannot compete with the economic and military power of the United States. In this sense, Venezuelan oil ends up being ideal because, first, it has these characteristics. Second, it already has American infrastructure that was built before Chavismo, which is present there and could be easily updated. And third is the distance. From the United States to Venezuela, across the Caribbean Sea, if you consider at least from the Caribbean Sea to Florida or to Texas, through the Gulf of Mexico, it is much closer than a cargo ship bringing it from the Arabian Gulf, from Kuwait, from Qatar, from Saudi Arabia, etc. So, there is immense interest in this. And President Donald Trump knows that this directly affects his popularity, because more abundant oil in the market means cheaper oil. This makes other things in society cheaper, and with the cost of living in the United States, which has grown a lot, he can compensate and obviously make people feel richer or feel that their money is worth more. So, this necessity has an important character in US domestic politics. He made this very clear in his press conference. Other presidents hid this issue behind supposed democracy or fighting terrorism, which were also some of the State Department's desires, but not the main one. Whereas Trump was very clear, look, we want to bring prosperity to Venezuelans and to those who are in Venezuela and those who are outside, but we want to be reimbursed for the oil that was stolen from us. Because in Trump's view, since they built all that infrastructure for their oil companies within Venezuela and were unable to access this oil for the past few years, they were robbed of an investment they made in the past. This is the US view, that clear America First policy, which was again embodied by President Donald Trump, who is quite sincere. We can criticize all his methods and criticize all this theatricality he often uses, but he is sincere, he makes his intentions very clear. Look, I will not attack Iran because I want to bring democracy to their land. I will not attack Iran because I am afraid they will build a nuclear weapon and go against US interests. He went there and attacked. The same thing now with Venezuela. So, this sincerity shows that the world has also reached a moment of anarchy of multilateralism. And I will explain this to you at the end of this video. Speaking of the other two reasons I mentioned at the beginning, the second has to do with the projection of regional influence in geopolitics. Obviously, Donald Trump, like Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping, believes that the world is divided into spheres of influence. And this is a very clear mentality, a philosophy of superpowers. After all, no superpower became a superpower solely by its own capability. It also has to do with spheres of influence, alliances created, and obviously, this system of regional hierarchy. In the view of Trump, Putin, and Xi Jinping, they would be on equal footing because they have large countries in terms of territory, China, the United States, and Russia, among the three or four largest countries in the world, being military powers with super powerful armies, many nuclear warheads, and being economic powers. In the case of the United States and China, because Russia is not an economic power, a country where people are middle class, but comparatively with GDP, scientific production, and technological production, perhaps military, Russia competes with one of the two, but in other areas, like IT, artificial intelligence, electric cars, mining, rare earth elements, all of this, the United States and China are far ahead of Russia, but Russia is there because it has 5,000 nuclear warheads, it inherited the former Soviet empire. Obviously, it couldn't not be there. And it seems to me that a gentlemen's agreement was quietly sealed behind the scenes. What is apparent at the moment is that Trump has his sphere of influence throughout the Western Hemisphere, therefore the entire American continent, i.e., North, Central, and South America, just as Russia would have part of Eastern Europe, part of the Middle East, and consequently part of Europe. And this is where a big question arises for Europe. And China with part of Asia and Africa, which is also being divided with Russia. After all, it's a topic that is rarely discussed in the media, but Africa today is not composed solely of European neocolonialism, with some remaining French companies that are problematic, but it is composed of Russian warlords, Chinese infrastructure that has indebted many of these states through loans to Africans, with payments through minerals. So, there are a series of things happening on this African continent where I am today that are not being commented on, but for all intents and purposes, the United States has its sphere of influence in Africa. This has been divided between China and Russia. And Asia naturally for the Chinese, as they already are, Central Asia, if we look at Southeast Asia, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, also with a lot of influence, Mongolia, then the Koreas are a complicated issue, North Korea obviously on the side of Russia and China, but Japan and South Korea remain an enigma, and obviously Taiwan, the territorial reconquest desire of the Chinese Communist Party over the island that has been governed autonomously since 1949. Perhaps a topic for another video, but they believe in this. So, for Donald Trump, having a country so rich in natural resources like Venezuela allied with his complete antagonists means a problem. And in this sense, for him, it is legitimate to conquer Venezuela or at least change, make a flip, change the government from anti-American to pro-American, just as he will, in my opinion, turn a blind eye if Putin does the same in Ukraine, in Estonia, Latvia, or if Xi Jinping arrives and does the same in Taiwan, or starts to interfere even more and increase his ties with India, for example. This can happen, why not? And it is quite worrying for us who are not children or citizens of these three empires, because we will always be pawns of theirs. I usually say that it would be good if we could always be independent of everything and have our morals guiding us in all aspects. But when it comes to geopolitics, there is this harsh realism, this harsh reality that, deep down, we depend on a system of alliances and the system of the strongest often prevails. It is not ideal, it is not what we want, it is not what many jurists and human rights activists and statesmen of the post-war era envisioned, but it is how the world has been shaped in recent decades. And in this sense, Brazil, which does not have nuclear weapons, has a faltering military, an economy that sometimes rises and sometimes falls, is a major agricultural producer, but not a major producer of specific technology, except for Embraer, everything else Brazil produces is surpassed by other competitors. So, it cannot compete with any of these three. Europe, the same thing, it always ends up under the wings of the United States, cannot speak very loudly, despite not agreeing with many of the measures taken, especially by Donald Trump, while other countries in the world already have their alliances clearly defined. This is worrying because it opens the precedent for these historical revisionisms or this will above the law to be carried out through military maneuvers like this. In the case in question, it is worth saying that it is indeed a breach of Venezuelan sovereignty, even though Nicolás Maduro is not the legitimate head of state of the country. It is a contradictory statement, and obviously it is, but the country's borders, the country's resources do not belong to that single individual, even if he has momentary control through force and the autocracy he imposed on his population. And this opens the precedent for other countries that also have very little regard for democracy and human rights to do the same to neighbors they do not feel comfortable with. The clearest example is Russia with Ukraine. Perhaps it was the most recent geopolitical event that gave legitimacy to all of this, because it started from a historical revisionism, breaking the sovereignty of a state to take control of its resources and its lands. This is basically what the United States has done at other times in history and has apparently done here in Venezuela. For now, it is good to say that Trump said he will take over the United States, govern the United States perhaps for the next few months, also taking control of the oil resources as a form of payment for the work done by the Americans until a fair transition is made. In international politics, in international law, there is that old phrase: "If you break it, you own it." If you go into a store, bump into something and break it, it belongs to you. So, there's no point in going there, breaking it, removing Maduro, and simply doing nothing, leaving chaos, a civil war, or armed militias to take over, rival groups to make the population suffer even more. Therefore, the United States, according to Trump, will intervene for some time. He did not specify how long, until everything is settled and new elections can take place. I believe with the possible participation of María Corina Machado, who is a very strong, charismatic, and popular voice, but she is not a consensus within the opposition or within Venezuela. Therefore, in my opinion, considering the circumstances we have at hand today, the best scenario would be a peaceful, democratic transition, without armed violence, and the guarantee of universal and fair elections for all candidates who can present their platform to Venezuelans, and they choose their destiny. When we talk about the realistic aspect, it is good to say that, even though this is a clear breach of international law, when we look at geopolitics and analyze it from the perspective of realpolitik, of what we have in hand, Venezuelans had no other alternative than foreign interference. Speaking from a utopian, idealistic point of view, it would be great if the Maduro dictatorship could be ended by Venezuelans themselves with a popular uprising, everyone marching to the Miraflores Palace, deposing Maduro, and establishing a new democratic order. Considering how corroded the institutions are, how widespread the corruption of the Armed Forces is, what chance would Venezuelans, who can barely afford three meals a day, have to fight against a dictator's military apparatus? Answer me. None. Therefore, for this very reason, in the view of those more realistic political scientists who follow Realpolitik, this was the only alternative Venezuela had. Perhaps not the United States, perhaps not kidnapping Maduro. There are a series of other opportunities. Some have even commented that the armed forces could carry out a self-coup or, with the help of Colombia, of Latin American countries, negotiate Maduro's exile, be it in Mexico, Russia, China, etc. But this never materialized, and therefore the Americans ended up being the only hope, even if the methods are extremely questionable. And now you will call me indecisive, someone who doesn't want to give an opinion. I am giving my opinion. I hate Nicolás Maduro's dictatorial regime, but I question the methods used by a superpower to impose its will. Even though, in the view of many analysts, this was the only option left for Venezuelans, especially those who remained in Venezuela, because the Venezuelans in the diaspora, the 8 million Venezuelans, obviously depend on their own work to send money to their families and keep the country running, because with a minimum wage of $30 per month, there was really not much chance for them to get out of this situation. And finally, the third reason I told you about has to do with the demonstration of power. When we consider that Russia would probably have liked to do the same with Zelensky and failed, and the United States, with its military apparatus, carries out such a quick infiltration and extraction operation, it demonstrates to its antagonists, Russia and China, and any other enemy of the United States, that they have the power to carry out operations of this magnitude in an extremely urbanized region like the capital Caracas, a mountainous region with adverse geographical conditions, and show others that they are on top. Even though we have not had any real confrontations between Russians and Americans throughout history, and Russians and Chinese and Americans as well, at this moment, except for a few moments in the Korean War, the Vietnam War, it is a demonstration of strength and speaks the language of these three leaders I mentioned, Trump, Putin, Xi Jinping, the language of force, of demonstrating power, of carrying out military operations, of holding military parades with new armaments, as was done in Beijing, it is something that speaks very well to these leaders and their supporters. Therefore, it sends a powerful message very quickly. The main reason, we know, is economic, as I said, political, geopolitical, demonstration of power, but this creates a dangerous precedent and, in my opinion, puts a target on the forehead or back of some other countries. If we look at the Western Hemisphere, in the Americas, there are now only two other dictatorial governments that are contrary to the United States. There are governments that are contrary to American policy because they are naturally left-wing and President Trump is right-wing, conservative. But they are democratic governments. You see the elected government in Colombia, Gustavo Petro's democratic government was elected by free elections. President Lula's government, despite its contradictions, was a government elected by the Brazilian people. Recently, Bolivia, which had many problems, elected a right-wing leader, meaning the left turned right in Bolivia. The same happened in Chile, it was Gabriel Boric, now José Antonio Kast, the left turned right. But they are democratic countries. The only two countries that are not democratic and that know they are much weaker than Venezuela are Cuba, a declared enemy of the United States for a long time, and Daniel Ortega's Nicaragua. In the case of Cuba, there are no resources, there is no great economic advantage for the United States, considering that Cuba is a very agrarian country and mainly produces sugarcane, tobacco, coffee, etc. There are few commodities that could interest the very greedy pockets of Americans, but it would be easy to carry out, considering they did it in Caracas, why not do it in Havana? And Marco Rubio, who is of Cuban descent, made it clear that if he were a political leader in Havana, he would be afraid to sleep at night. This makes it clear that Cuba could indeed be the next target of such an operation, a country that is also going through an immense economic crisis and is now likely to face an even more severe supply crisis. After all, the former Maduro government was what energetically sustained the island of Cuba with the little Venezuelan oil that was being exploited in recent years. I think it reached a point of 1 million barrels per day. Venezuela has the capacity to produce three or five million barrels per day. So, it was very little, but essential for Cubans. The other country, Nicaragua, ends up being something similar to what happened in the past. The United States already had an intervention in Panama in the 1990s, with Noriega. And Ortega, in this case, could also be a target of a similar operation, he with the Sandinista front, which even persecutes Catholic priests, an extremely difficult situation, but it is not a country that offers vast resources for the United States to take this initiative. I believe that perhaps by the end of Trump's term, we will have news, but not for now. Venezuela ends up being the crown jewel of the three Latin American dictatorships, and the United States had the main desire to change the government and put a leadership a little closer to American interests. This raises a red flag for Iran, which is also going through a major economic crisis. The Iranian rial is now worth practically 1,300,000. It's absurd. When I was there in 2019, it was 120,000, so it has lost practically 10 times the value of the currency. The regime of the ayatollahs is extremely unpopular. And we know that the United States might have the means to carry out an intervention there, a hybrid war, something that could further destabilize the Iranian regime, as it has in the past. However, Iran is different from Venezuela because, first, it has much more modern weaponry. It is a country that is geographically much closer to its allies, Russia and China, and also has very difficult terrain for any type of infiltration, very mountainous, desert regions, and a population of 90 million people. So, I believe it would be very different to extract Nicolás Maduro in Caracas than to extract the Ayatollah Khamenei in Tehran. But it raises a red flag because they are countries contrary to American interests, countries that have strong problems with the West, and resource-rich countries, which would justify the economic cost of such an intervention for future benefit, in addition to being non-nuclearized nations. Only those who have nuclear weapons are truly independent, as we see with North Korea, which could also be a target of such operations, but because it has 40 nuclear warheads, few countries would mess with it, even though it is also a nefarious and terrible dictator of our time. Brazil is going through a complex situation because it has not managed this crisis well, while trying to position itself as a regional leader. President Lula tried to establish dialogue and mediation, but perhaps due to personal issues, even the Itamaraty (Ministry of Foreign Affairs), Celso Amorim is very close to Nicolás Maduro, has a view of the world, at times, in my opinion, very 20th-century, of the Cold War, of the Soviet Union, United States, etc., and ends up being influenced by it. And he failed to achieve a more honorable exit that would bring stability. And this raises doubts for the electoral moment, especially because Venezuela was a common issue in past elections. It may now, perhaps because we are 10 months away from the elections, give an advantage to President Lula, as it is not a hot topic on the eve of the election, but Brazil certainly did not emerge victorious as it should have or as it would have diplomatically. A country that is moderate and tries to bring both sides together. Criticizing the violation of Venezuelan sovereignty is legitimate, as long as you also criticize the violation of Iraq's sovereignty in the past, criticize the violation of Georgia's sovereignty by Russia in 2008, of Ukraine by Russia in 2014, 2022, and of so many other African countries whose sovereignty has also been affected by the interests of other powers. There's no point in taking sides and thinking there's good imperialism or bad imperialism. There are interests, there are empires. And if you want to be a consistent person, you cannot have the hypocrisy of liking one or another just because of your ideological line. Well, these are the facts we have at hand. I will certainly update you as we get new news about a transitional government, about election dates, about the United States' plans to rebuild Venezuela. And I think the Venezuelan case deserves special attention, just for me to finish the video, which is already getting very long, in relation to other cases of US intervention. If we take the example of Iraq, they managed to remove Saddam Hussein, but they brought immense regional projection to Iran, as Iraq is predominantly Shiite. And to this day, the country has not been stabilized. It is still a country with a lot of instability. In the desert of Iraq, near Syria, there are fundamentalist groups. It is a country with many human rights violations. The same for Afghanistan, a disastrous intervention. In 20 years, the United States spent more than 1 trillion dollars and replaced the Taliban with the Taliban. A country today that practices terrible gender apartheid. Women live in a situation of extreme destitution and profound psychological and physical abuse, but they are two countries that have never had democracy in their structure. People do not know what democracy is, what it is to have institutions, what it is to have separation of powers, what it is to have elections, what it is to have freedom of the press, freedom of opinion. Venezuelans know what that is. Perhaps this new generation of the last 20 years does not know these concepts, but for a long time in South America, Venezuela was an example of democratic stability and solid institutions. So, I think, unlike the Afghan and Iraqi cases, which were a complete failure of US intervention, if it is done with good intentions and with people who understand the region, who understand what Venezuela is, who understand what Latin America is, what this Caribbean identity, this Amazonian identity is, we can certainly have a country being reborn democratically. That, at least, is my hope. And I will not only be rooting for it but also following the news to bring you these analyses. To all who stayed until the end, my heartfelt thanks. I am here in Africa recording videos for you. Soon I will return with more series that I have to post, Australia, South Korea, Sri Lanka, and also the countries I am visiting now, which is a surprise. A big hug, stay with God, and good night, good morning to all of you.