Washington: The US military operation that removed Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in January 2026 has renewed debate over Washington’s strategic interests in oil-rich countries and the role of energy resources in its foreign policy.
The United States announced on January 3 that Maduro had been captured following a large-scale military operation. Washington had accused his government of involvement in drug trafficking and organised crime. Maduro denied the allegations.
The subsequent US approach to Venezuela has also had a significant energy dimension. President Donald Trump said Washington intended to control Venezuela’s oil resources, while US officials moved to oversee oil sales and revenues. Reuters reported that companies including Chevron, Vitol and Trafigura competed for roles in handling Venezuelan crude exports.
Venezuela possesses one of the world’s largest proven oil reserves, making its energy sector central to the country’s economic and geopolitical importance. Following Maduro’s removal, Venezuelan oil exports rose sharply, with Reuters reporting that exports reached about 800,000 barrels per day in January as US restrictions were eased and Washington-supervised arrangements were introduced.
The issue has since evolved beyond direct US control. In September, Venezuela’s interim government signed or advanced agreements with international energy companies, including a deal involving US producer Continental Resources and Venezuela’s state oil company PDVSA. Another agreement was signed with France’s TotalEnergies.
Iran represents another major point of tension in the wider debate. The country has substantial oil resources and has remained subject to extensive US sanctions. However, US energy data shows that Washington’s dependence on Middle Eastern oil has declined significantly. In 2025, Gulf countries accounted for about 8% of US crude oil imports, while Canada remained by far the largest supplier.
At the same time, the United States has become the world’s largest crude oil producer. EIA data shows that US crude production averaged a record 13.6 million barrels per day in 2025.
These developments complicate the argument that US interventions are driven solely by a need for foreign oil. Washington has cited security, drug trafficking, sanctions enforcement and regional influence as major reasons for its policies. Critics, meanwhile, point to Venezuela’s enormous oil resources and the expansion of US influence over its energy sector as evidence that economic and strategic interests are also important.
The debate over Venezuela therefore remains closely linked to a broader question: how much do energy resources, national security and geopolitical influence shape US policy toward oil-producing countries? Recent developments provide evidence for competing interpretations, but the relative weight of each factor remains contested.
