The Logic of Plunder: Why U.S. Invasion of Venezuela is More than a Regime Change
by Rezgar Omer
The U.S. invasion of Venezuela may appear, on the surface, to be the product of an arrogant and foolish foreign policy. However, this appearance is deceptive. It is insufficient to answer the ominous question of why such an invasion occurred. To understand the profound motivations, we must recognize the deep drivers rooted in a destructive “philosophy of policymaking” that sees global politics through the lens of Realpolitik.
For two decades, the 21st century has been defined by tragedies, wars, and the redistribution of global interests. The invasion of Venezuela is a profound testament to the continuation of this Realpolitik, where the unilateral interest of the hegemonic state replaces commitment to international law and democratic ideals. This is evident in the current U.S. political landscape, where the Constitution itself has been violated by state institutions, reflecting a deep internal crisis.
The Real Driver: Domestic Failure and Corporate Plunder
The primary engine for military intervention is not foreign policy success, but domestic political and economic failure. The intervention offers the current U.S. administration a political-economic benefit, the plunder of Venezuela’s assets as a lifeline to rescue their failing economy and combat global rivals, particularly China.
Faced with palpable domestic and international failure, a President may be seeking an external “military victory” to redefine their existence. Trump’s volatile motives are designed to enact a destabilizing plan for the world, aiming to repair his damaged image, especially for his domestic base. Crucially, this involves guaranteeing a rapid mechanism of plunder for the powerful economic cartels that helped put him in power. The military action becomes a bloody theatrical act intended to conceal the systemic failures of the administration at home.
Geopolitical Bargains and Moral Silence
This scenario is enabled by a complex geopolitical backdrop, specifically the expected “silence” of rival global powers. A hypothetical agreement, for example, to impose a peace in Ukraine more favorable to Russian interests, could demand a price: Russia’s neutrality during the invasion of Venezuela.
These backroom deals between superpowers illustrate a cynical global structure where the fate of “smaller nations” is defined solely by self-interest and transactional politics. Russia’s acceptance of an invasion outside its core security zone, in exchange for gains closer to home, highlights a world where sovereignty is negotiable and the powerful write the rules.
The Panama Precedent: Erasing Consciousness
We must look beyond simple regime change to understand the true barbarism of the invasion. The 1989 U.S. invasion of Panama provides a chilling historical parallel. The goal was not merely to overthrow Noriega; it was a political purge targeting the intellectual and critical infrastructure of the nation.
The strategy was the deliberate erasure of the country’s intellectual foundation, specifically targeting political opponents, activists, and all intellectuals. This included university professors, artists, writers, and union leaders, anyone who carried a form of “consciousness” or the capacity for critical thought. The logic is the “pre-emptive eradication” of potential future revolts against a U.S.-backed puppet government.
If this strategy is applied to Venezuela, the victims will not be limited to military personnel or state structures. The offensive will be directed at social and ideological formations that give expression to class antagonisms and organize resistance to imperial domination, universities, independent media, artists, and critical intellectuals. These spaces function as sites where working-class and popular forces articulate political consciousness and contest both foreign intervention and domestic class power. Their suppression is aimed not at protecting a putative “national interest,” but at dismantling the material and ideological conditions necessary for organized class resistance.
Destroying this critical class serves one primary purpose: to eliminate the ability to articulate a national, anti-occupation narrative. It ensures that the post-invasion regime stabilizes over a population disarmed of political consciousness, unable to formulate a unified, independent political vision. The invasion, therefore, is not just a military operation; it is a campaign to destroy the intellectual and ideological foundations of an entire society.
Note: This is an update of article that was originally published in Kurdish on Tuesday, December 9, 2025, in Kurdistan Road (ڕێگای کوردستان), the official publication of the Kurdistan Communist Party (Issue 1466, Page 7).
The Panama comparison really clarifies the long-term strategy here. Its not just regime change but intellectual purge to prevent future resitance. That section about targeting professors and artists, basically anyone with critical thinking capacity, shows how these operations work at the ideological level not just military. I dunno if enough people realize that dismantling a nations ability to articulate its own narrative is the real endgame.
The author's assertions of American intentions are bang on. No imaginary fabrications needed. After all, this fascist regime is already performing a similar strategy at home in purging government, education, media and corporations of the 'unfaithful', disloyal', 'woke' and 'Marxist extremists' taking over America (lol). Threatening other nations worldwide, this extremism rockets upwards as if normal.
Meanwhile, the organized crime of the convicted criminal Orange Fuhrer and his extremist gang expands as Congress sits on its hands - Dems & Thugs. The American experiment is reaching its logical conclusions with anti-democracy, Manifest Destiny and American Exceptionalism increasing its extremist ideological narrative and operations. The illusory miasma of patriotic madness and 'greatness' has erupted again into a proud and more violent fascism of profit taking and power.