There is no International rules-based order. It is only a comforting phantasm of peripheral nations. The real law of the earth in the 21st century is blatant and crude (excuse the pun). Ideas of multi-polarity are overdone. Whilst there are areas of strategic interest — i.e., the U.S. Monroe Doctrine in America, Chinese maritime dominion in the South China Sea — the real game is played out in brute geoeconomics, in a murky maelstrom of swirling competitions. Competitions are multilateral, and it echoes Mearsheimer’s doctrine of “zero-sum” competition of winners and losers, a Hobbesian struggle for land and sea. Europe is in a downward spiral of its own making. The new vogue is “nation building” rather than globalisation, and the Europeans have missed the boat. The real power struggle is between the U.S. and China. Yet Russia, for all its bluster, is the real loser in the new dynamic. (RELATED: Importing Chaos: The Paradox of Nation-building)
Though continents apart, their fates are tied to a broader struggle over energy, influence, and great-power rivalry…
Geopolitical crises rarely unfold in isolation. While the world focuses on Ukraine’s fight for survival, Venezuela sits on its own geopolitical death row. Though continents apart, their fates are tied to a broader struggle over energy, influence, and great-power rivalry, with the United States increasingly central to both theatres. The world splits into winners and losers. For example, Cuba has avoided complete economic collapse for one reason: subsidized oil from Venezuela. Under Chávez and Maduro, Caracas supplied Havana with free or heavily discounted crude, keeping Cuba’s stagnant economy afloat. Should conflict erupt with Venezuela, a possibility analysts are taking seriously, the Cuban regime would lose its final energy lifeline and could collapse alongside Maduro. For some policymakers in Washington, this is not an unfortunate side effect but an acceptable, even desirable, outcome. (RELATED: Putin’s Caribbean Gambit)
The Miami Factor
Senator Marco Rubio and the Cuban exile community in Miami have spent 65 years pushing for the dismantling of the Castro regime. A destabilized Venezuela that cuts off oil to Cuba would achieve a long-sought goal of weakening Havana’s communist leadership. Meanwhile, a post-Maduro Cuba could become ripe for foreign capital. Some observers even speculate that Donald Trump, ever the businessman, may envision a return of grand casinos and American tourism in Havana, should the political landscape shift. The days of Playboys and Batista are back. While Cuba is a secondary objective, the primary strategic concerns in Venezuela run deeper. Washington is increasingly preoccupied with countering China’s growing influence in the Western Hemisphere, which has been expanding through oil-backed loans and infrastructure agreements. (RELATED: How Cuba Is Becoming Beijing’s Caribbean Outpost)
A major 2020 CSIS report highlighted Beijing’s role:
China’s trade deals … have sustained the repressive Maduro regime, and China’s non-transparent involvement in Venezuela’s energy sector indicates deeper meddling in Venezuela’s political and social structures.
The Wilson Center concluded that while China once heavily backed Venezuela, its confidence in the regime has eroded: “For years China lent to Venezuela with few policy conditions… under shaky leadership the economic and political dysfunction has grown and Chinese confidence in the Bolivarian nation appears to have plummeted.”
A further CSIS study on Venezuela’s fragility noted: “China has already lent Venezuela more than $50 billion payable in oil. There is increasing possibility Beijing will restructure its loans to delay oil payments freeing up oil exports elsewhere.”
The more Beijing withdraws, the more vulnerable Maduro becomes and the more opportunity Washington sees for regime change. At the center of the Venezuela question is oil. Venezuela possesses some of the world’s largest proven reserves, but the crucial detail is the type of oil. U.S. refineries, roughly 132 in total, are overwhelmingly configured to process heavy sour crude, the very type produced in Canada, Mexico, and Venezuela. Conversely, the U.S. domestic boom in light sweet crude is largely unrefinable at home without massive reconfiguration. Re-tooling U.S. refineries would cost roughly $2 billion per facility and take a decade to complete. In the face of strained trade relations with Canada and Mexico, ensuring long-term access to Venezuelan heavy crude becomes strategically important.
A 2024 Foreign Affairs article described Washington’s strategy as an attempt “to hasten a democratic transition, apply long-term pressure to the Maduro regime.”
This pressure campaign — economic, diplomatic, and geopolitical — is designed to weaken the regime without direct intervention. A transition or collapse in Venezuela would not remain confined to Latin America. It would immediately affect the global environment in which Ukraine fights its war.
Think tanks such as RAND and the Atlantic Council warn that “major crises in multiple regions stretch U.S. strategic bandwidth thin.”
On the other hand, restoring Venezuelan heavy-crude flows to global markets would weaken Russia’s energy leverage.
If Washington becomes preoccupied with a major crisis or political transition in Venezuela, the intensity of support for Ukraine could be affected. Russia would likely interpret such a distraction as an opportunity to escalate or pressure Europe. This is the present Russian view. On the other hand, restoring Venezuelan heavy-crude flows to global markets would weaken Russia’s energy leverage. Moreover, the fall of a Moscow- and Beijing-aligned regime in Latin America would shrink Russia’s propaganda reach in the Global South.
In other words, Venezuela’s fate will shape Ukraine’s battlefield indirectly but materially.
As global tensions escalate, especially amid the war in Ukraine, Washington appears more willing to force a strategic reshuffling in its own hemisphere. And while Ukraine dominates today’s headlines, Venezuela could be next year’s newsmaker. The current competition between great powers is a struggle for a new world order. “Potemkin villages” were the structures built to impress Empress Catherine II of Russia in the 18th century, creating the illusion of prosperity. This is the Russian modus operandi of bluster. Back home, the nation faces economic ruin, a demographic implosion, and the degrading of its only asset — oil. The “Potemkin State of Putin” could soon be joining Venezuela on death row.
READ MORE from Brian Patrick Bolger:
International Law Is Not Protecting Individual Safety
Ursula von der Leyen: A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing
Brian Patrick Bolger has taught international law and political philosophy at universities in Europe. His articles have appeared in leading magazines such as The Spectator, The Salisbury Review, etc, and journals worldwide in the U.S., the U.K., Italy, and Canada. His new book, Nowhere Fast: Democracy and Identity in the Twenty First Century, is published now by Ethics International Press. He is an adviser to several think tanks and corporations on geopolitical issues.
