By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez criticized the U.S. operation targeting Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, suggesting it is motivated by oil and regime change rather than drug-trafficking. Colombian President Gustavo Petro condemned the operation, deploying forces to the border and rejecting the aggression against Venezuela’s sovereignty. Mexico also issued a statement, urging respect for international law and calling for an end to any aggression, highlighting Latin America’s commitment to peace. Russia and Iran, Maduro’s allies, also condemned the attack, calling it an act of armed aggression.
Read the original article here
AOC’s assertion that the operation targeting Maduro is fundamentally about oil and regime change, rather than a genuine concern over drug trafficking, hits a particularly raw nerve, and frankly, she has a point. It’s a conclusion that’s hard to ignore when considering the context and the actions of the former administration.
The former president, in his own words, made the connection between Venezuela’s resources and his intentions crystal clear, alluding to the desire to have the country’s oil back, or what he perceived as its “stolen” oil. These were not subtle hints or veiled statements; they were proclamations. It’s hard to overlook this when we have the former president openly stating this in press conferences.
And then there’s the jarring fact of the pardon granted to the former Honduran president, who was convicted on drug trafficking charges. The former president, despite the Justice Department’s findings of him being at the center of a massive global drug trafficking conspiracy, was pardoned. This decision, to many, undercuts any pretense of a serious anti-drug stance. If the primary goal was truly to combat drug trafficking, the pardon seems incredibly counterproductive. It’s like sending a clear message: that the fight against drugs is secondary to other, more strategic objectives.
The narrative of “Narco-terrorism” being the sole justification for these actions also falls apart under scrutiny. This phrase, as noted, isn’t even a legally recognized crime, which suggests a fabricated legal justification. It’s a flimsy smokescreen for a power play. The timing of these moves – during a period of international tension and political uncertainty – only reinforces the suspicions of a broader agenda.
It’s clear that it isn’t just some random claim. The former president openly stated the goal to have the oil back. This kind of rhetoric, coupled with the pardon, paints a vivid picture. It reinforces the idea that the underlying motivations are less about law enforcement and more about gaining control over vital resources and reshaping the government to better suit these interests.
The international implications of such actions are immense. Undermining the sovereignty of a nation, based on flimsy pretexts, can only lead to a breakdown of international norms and create instability. It’s a dangerous path, and it’s no wonder so many are concerned. The world watches, and the credibility of any nation involved will be impacted.
The focus on oil isn’t surprising. Venezuela has massive oil reserves. It’s a fact that has shaped the country’s history and its relationship with the world, and it is a resource that will always be a target for those who seek to control it. The former president’s words, coupled with his actions, suggest that this is the primary driver of the current policies.
AOC’s assessment isn’t just a critique; it’s a reflection of the facts and the observations of many who have been following the situation. She is calling out what she sees and what many others see, is not just about drugs. It’s about a grab for power, resources, and influence.