Is the Venezuela Operation Part of a U.S.–China Power Struggle
Is the Venezuela Operation Part of a U.S.–China Power Struggle?
On January 3, 2026, the United States executed one of the most dramatic and controversial military operations in recent history: U.S. forces swiftly struck Venezuela, seized key military installations, and captured sitting President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, transporting them to the United States to face federal charges. President Donald Trump openly declared that the U.S. would “run” Venezuela during a transition period. The unprecedented military action — dubbed Operation Absolute Resolve by some analysts — has sent shockwaves through international politics. While the U.S. frames the operation as a law enforcement and anti-narcotics effort, global reactions and geopolitical analysis suggest the move may instead be deeply entangled within a broader U.S.–China strategic rivalry.
This article examines the complex layers of the Venezuela operation, assesses whether it indeed fits into a U.S.–China great-power struggle, and explores the implications for global geopolitics, economic interests, and regional stability.
I. A Sudden and Extraordinary Operation
The operation’s speed, precision, and scale stunned the world.
U.S. forces launched a rapid military strike, deploying more than 150 aircraft — including F-35s, F-22s, bombers, and surveillance assets — to dominate airspace and disable Venezuelan defenses. What followed was a swift ground and helicopter insertion, culminating in the capture of Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. U.S. officials then transported them to U.S. territory to face drug trafficking and organized crime charges.
Washington portrayed the mission as a lawful enforcement action against a “narco-terror regime.” Critics, however, have described the operation as a blatant breach of international norms and state sovereignty.
Trump’s rhetoric was striking: he emphasized U.S. power, claimed responsibility for the operation’s success, and insisted on U.S. stewardship of Venezuelan institutions and natural resources during a transition.
II. U.S. Official Justifications vs. Global Reaction
A. U.S. Government Narrative
From Washington’s perspective, the operation was justified on multiple grounds:
A legal basis: Venezuelan government officials were indicted in U.S. courts on drug trafficking and terrorism-related charges.
Regional security: The U.S. alleged that Caracas functioned as a hub for narcotics networks and criminal enterprises.
Homeland defense: Senior officials claimed the threat emanating from Venezuela justified intervention under U.S. law.
Public messaging in the U.S. focused largely on removing a corrupt and criminal regime and restoring democratic norms in Venezuela.
B. International Response
Reactions varied dramatically — often along geopolitical fault lines:
China condemned the operation as a breach of international law and Venezuelan sovereignty, demanding Maduro’s immediate release and labeling the action as hegemonic interference.
Russia echoed similar criticisms and viewed the operation as illegitimate and dangerous.
Many Latin American governments expressed concern about precedent and regional stability.
United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres warned of a dangerous precedent violating norms of sovereignty and non-interference.
The intensity of global criticism — particularly from China — underscores the geopolitical dimensions many observers see in what the U.S. insists is a law enforcement mission.
III. Venezuela’s Geopolitical Position: A Pivot in Great-Power Competition
To understand whether the operation reflects U.S.–China rivalry, it’s essential to examine Venezuela’s geopolitical role.
A. Oil and Energy Strategy
Venezuela possesses some of the world’s largest proven oil reserves — estimated at over 300 billion barrels. Before the U.S. sanctions that began in 2019, Venezuela was a significant global oil exporter, and China became its most important oil customer during the sanctions era. Beijing imported hundreds of thousands of barrels per day from Caracas, making Venezuela strategically valuable to China’s energy security and diversification efforts.
Chinese investment in Venezuela’s oil sector — often tied to oil-for-credit programs worth billions — fostered a deep economic relationship. Caracas also began settling some transactions in yuan instead of dollars, raising concerns among U.S. policymakers about the future of the petrodollar. De-dollarization discussions were part of broader debates about global financial power.
Seizing control of Venezuelan oil resources — or preventing China from accessing them — could be seen as part of a broader U.S. strategy to reshape global energy flows and reduce Chinese energy security.
B. China’s Strategic Foothold in Latin America
China’s influence in Latin America expanded rapidly in the past two decades — including infrastructure investment, loans, trade agreements, and diplomatic support. Venezuela became a key node in China’s engagement with the region, with ties that went beyond energy to political support and financial lending.
U.S. policymakers have increasingly viewed China’s deepening presence in Latin America as a strategic challenge — one that undermines the Western Hemisphere’s traditional U.S. sphere of influence under the Monroe Doctrine. Indeed, recent U.S. policy — jokingly referred to in some analyses as the “Donroe Doctrine” — emphasizes pushing out rivals such as China and Russia to maintain U.S. dominance in the hemisphere.
Thus, controlling Venezuela — or limiting China’s access — fits into Washington’s long-term objective of curbing Chinese influence near U.S. borders.
C. Oil Blockade and Resource Control
Following Maduro’s capture, the U.S. tightened an oil blockade on Venezuela. The U.S. demands that Venezuela’s new government sever ties with adversarial states — including China, Russia, and Iran — in exchange for lifting sanctions. Talks include transferring millions of barrels of oil to the U.S. under U.S. direction.
China’s oil import strategy is being tested. Although Venezuelan oil constitutes a relatively modest share of total Chinese crude imports compared to Russia, Saudi Arabia, and others, the disruption of discounted Venezuelan supplies could strain some Chinese refiners and complicate Beijing’s energy portfolio.
IV. The U.S.–China Strategic Rivalry in the Broader Context
A. Great-Power Competition in Asia and Latin America
U.S.–China rivalry is most visible in Asia — especially around Taiwan, the South China Sea, and supply chain competition. However, as one recent analysis noted, pressure applied from Venezuela to Taiwan reflects a coordinated global strategy where Washington and Beijing compete for influence without engaging in full-scale war.
Beyond oil, the struggles over technological leadership, supply chains, currency influence, military presence, alliances, and diplomatic leadership all feed into a larger competition.
B. Latin America as a Strategic Theater
Traditionally, Latin America was firmly within the U.S. strategic orbit. China’s rise introduced a new competitor in trade and diplomacy. Beijing’s strategy focused on economic engagement rather than military presence, but the effects are strategic nonetheless: China became a major lender, trade partner, and diplomatic supporter in multilateral forums.
From Washington’s perspective, that transition was unwelcome. Strategists worry that China’s economic presence could translate into political leverage and military collaboration in a region historically dominated by U.S. interests.
The Venezuela operation, then, is seen by many analysts not simply as a stand-alone intervention but as part of a broader geopolitical contest for influence and strategic resources, especially energy.
V. Chinese Response and Its Implications
China’s official reaction has been firm and rhetorical:
Beijing condemned the U.S. operation as a violation of international law and Venezuelan sovereignty.
China has urged the U.S. to release Maduro and criticized unilateral enforcement actions.
Chinese commentary emphasizes non-interference and respect for the UN Charter, framing U.S. actions as hegemonic.
Despite harsh rhetoric, China has stopped short of direct military involvement in Venezuela. Analysts suggest that Beijing will pursue economic and diplomatic responses rather than kinetic engagement — partly to avoid open confrontation with the U.S. and partly because its strategic interests in Venezuela — while significant — do not outweigh larger priorities in Asia and global markets.
Beijing’s response also appears calibrated: it underscores support for sovereignty yet avoids escalation into a direct clash. This has led some foreign policy observers to conclude that China lacks the capacity or political will to directly challenge U.S. military power in the Western Hemisphere, even as Washington projects force.
VI. Other Interpretations and Alternative Narratives
Some critics in the U.S. and abroad see the operation less as a targeted strategy against China and more as part of traditional U.S. hemispheric dominance or even domestic political motivations:
Some argue the operation is intended to strengthen U.S. control over global energy markets, indirectly affecting China but not as a primary goal.
Others see the campaign as part of Trump’s foreign policy legacy and broader political positioning.
Still others suggest the Venezuelan intervention is rooted primarily in anti-narcotics policy and regional security concerns.
These alternative views often emphasize that while the U.S.–China rivalry provides a geopolitical backdrop, it may not be the sole or even dominant driver of U.S. decision-making in Venezuela.
VII. Immediate and Long-Term Consequences
A. For Venezuela
The consequences in Venezuela are severe:
Economic collapse under intensified sanctions and blockades.
Political instability as institutions reorganize post-Maduro.
Humanitarian risk due to rising inflation, unemployment, and shortages.
B. For U.S.–China Relations
The operation has intensified tensions:
Beijing views U.S. military assertiveness as a threat to global norms.
Washington’s growing willingness to use force potentially signals a broader strategic posture aimed at containing China’s global influence.
Diplomatic channels are under strain as both nations trade accusations of unilateralism and violations of international law.
C. For the Global Order
The implications extend beyond U.S.–China:
The precedent of seizing a sitting head of state raises concerns about international norms.
The erosion of sovereignty as a principle may embolden or frighten other powers.
Global energy markets and strategic alliances are adjusting to the new status quo.
VIII. Conclusion: Power Struggle or Coincidence?
After examining the evidence, there is a compelling case that the U.S. operation in Venezuela is not merely a local or isolated event but part of a larger global strategic competition — including a rivalry with China — for influence, resources, and geopolitical positioning.
While the U.S. narrative emphasizes law enforcement and regional security, the broader context — especially Venezuela’s longstanding ties with China, its role in global oil markets, and Washington’s renewed emphasis on hemispheric dominance — suggests that U.S. policymakers likely considered China in their strategic calculus. The operation weakens Chinese economic influence in a resource-rich region, curtails access to discounted Venezuelan oil, and sends a signal to global powers about U.S. willingness to project force.
China’s response — condemnatory but cautious — further highlights the operation’s role in the larger great-power competition. Beijing’s strategic interests in Venezuela have been disrupted, and its ability to respond militarily is limited. The episode thus reveals the limits and asymmetries in U.S.–China competition.
Ultimately, the Venezuela operation appears to be a significant episode within the broader U.S.–China power struggle, one that will have lasting effects on Latin America, global energy politics, and the structure of international relations in the decades ahead.