Article épinglé

mercredi 14 janvier 2026

Rapport Hedges : L’élite du narcotrafic prête à diriger le Venezuela – Consortium News

 

History, as it’s understood in most Western countries, often misses important chapters that leave critical gaps in the story of how modern countries came to be. In Latin America in the 20th century, episodes of guerilla warfare and juntas are acknowledged, along with portrayals of a drug war, usually depicted through popular culture.

What is left out, however, is the clandestine involvement of American intelligence agencies, including the C.I.A. and D.E.A., and how their drug operations were intimately tied to the Latin American anticommunist brigades funded by Western capital throughout the Cold War, and the brutal liquidation of the Left these narco-terrorists often carried out.

Maureen Tkacik, investigations editor at The American Prospect, joins host Chris Hedges on this episode of The Chris Hedges Report, to chronicle some of these missing chapters, including ones connected to the current U.S. Secretary of State and Acting National Security Advisor Marco Rubio.

In her article “The Narco-Terrorist Elite,” Tkacik dives into Rubio’s [peripheral] personal ties to the drug trafficking racket in the 20th century as well as how this history informs his own policy, one that attempts to cynically use drug trafficking as a means to achieving the Trump administration’s extrajudicial goals.

“When Marco Rubio maligns the efficacy of interdiction and other traditional law enforcement approaches to mitigating narco trafficking in favor of military operations, as he did in a recent speech on Trump’s speedboat bombings, he is contradicting every empirical evaluation of drug war efficacy that exists,” Hedges says.

Host: Chris Hedges

Producer: Max Jones

Intro: Diego Ramos

Crew: Diego Ramos, Sofia Menemenlis and Victor Castellanos

 


Transcript

Chris Hedges: Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro is being held in a Brooklyn jail charged with smuggling cocaine into the United States. But even the Drug Enforcement Agency estimates that less than 10 percent of cocaine shipments to the U.S. come through Venezuela. The vast majority of cocaine shipments originate in Colombia and move through the Pacific route and Mexico. Added to this, most overdose deaths in the U.S. come from fentanyl. And fentanyl does not come from Venezuela.

There are no shortages of Latin American leaders and military chiefs who are heavily involved in drug trafficking but who are considered close allies of the United States. One of them, former Honduran president Juan Orlando Hernández, was pardoned by Donald Trump last month, after he was sentenced to 45 years in prison for conspiring to distribute over 400 tons of cocaine in the U.S., a conviction that was justified with far greater evidence than that which supports the charges levied against Maduro.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who is also Trump’s national security advisor, comes out of the rightwing Cuban exile community in Miami, one that has for decades engaged in drug trafficking and a dirty war against those it condemns, like Maduro, of being communists.

The investigative journalist Maureen Tkacik at The Prospect in her article, “The Narco-Terrorist Elite,” looks at the close ties these anti-communist Cubans, including Rubio’s inner circle, have with the drug trade and their full throated support for Latin American leaders who are engaged in drug trafficking, including Ecuadorean President Daniel Noboa, whose family fruit business is accused of trafficking 700 kilos of cocaine,

Joining me to discuss this long nexus between the drug trade in Latin America and the Cuban anti-communist movement is Maureen Tkacik. It’s a great article and let’s just go through it. I want to begin with how you open it. So you’re talking about Marco Rubio as a teenager working for his brother-in-law Orlando Cicilia. Explain.

Rubio, right, with Brazil’s former President Jair Bolsonaro in 2020.
(Alan Santos, Palácio do Planalto / Flickr /CC BY 2.0)

Maureen Tkacik: Well, Marco Rubio has a sister who is substantially older than him, maybe 10, 8 or 10 years older than him, and got married fairly young. She met a man named Orlando in high school. He had come over to Miami in the early 70s, I want to say 1972. They fell in love. His family moved to Las Vegas in 1979.

And I’m not sure why he, I think he has suggested that there was a strike. He thought that he would get better opportunities. He was working as a bartender and a banquet waiter. So he thought that there was a better opportunity in the restaurant business in Las Vegas.

So they go to Las Vegas and his sister doesn’t want to go and she stays in Miami with Orlando and many of his happiest childhood memories are times when they returned for Christmas to Miami, times they went home and Orlando made them a big home-style Cuban meal.

He butchered a whole pig. He put together Marco Rubio’s bicycle at Christmas when he was eight years old. Just this sort of wonderful figure in Marco Rubio’s life when they finally decide to move back to…

Chris Hedges: Let me just interrupt — this is according to Marco Rubio’s memoir, right? This is his version.

Maureen Tkacik: Yes, this is according to Marco Rubio’s memoir and there’s also been biographies. There’s a biography of him written by the Washington Post reporter, Manuel Roig-Franzia. So this is sort of, yes, this is the version of his life.

Orlando Cecilia begins working for a pet store in 1983 and he has Marco, little Marco, literal little Marco doing some odd jobs, building cages and looking after his dogs, pet related jobs. And Marco Rubio makes enough money to go see every single Miami Dolphins home game in, you know, the 1985 season, I think, maybe 1984-1985 season, I gotta get that right.

Anyhow, turns out, 1987 rolls along and Cecilia gets locked up. He’s one of, I think, 11 individuals indicted in this in Operation Giraffe or something like that, some reference to the pet store. Actually, it was a front for a cocaine and marijuana trafficking organization that, what do you know, had been in operation since 1976, was accused of trafficking at least $79 million worth of drugs, speaking in code words about the drugs on wires.

Marco Rubio yearbook photo at Miami Senior High School. (South Miami Senior High School / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)

Basically, the idea was that the pet store was a front for a cocaine trafficking organization. Now, the leader’s son of this operation has since starred on a very popular show called “Tiger King.” And he claims now that he only sold coke to support his animal habit because he loves exotic animals so much. But it’s an awful lot of drugs that he trafficked.

And this is a known story. It’s not like I broke the story of Marco Rubio’s brother-in-law being a drug trafficker. This has been well known since 2011. The story was broken by Univision. It somehow did not reach conventional wisdom. I sort of thought it had, but a lot of people have been shocked by this.

But I thought, if I look a little bit into this guy’s drug trafficking organization, I bet it might tell us something about the milieu of Cuban drug trafficking in Miami in the 80s and kind of how that fits into the larger geopolitical scene here, right?

And what do you know? What I didn’t realize until I started peeling away the layers is that cocaine trafficking, drug trafficking generally, in the United States between the late 60s, at least, and the late 80s was totally dominated by Bay of Pigs veterans, veterans of this supposed massive fuck up in American history, this sort of joke that [inaudible] years ago, it was a very, it lives on. It was a very successful sort of network.

All of those guys who were veterans, and I think that there were 1,500 veterans of the Bay of Pigs invasion, they had a level of prominence and a certain amount of respect in the community.

And a massive percentage of them got into drug trafficking in the late 60s. And this is from the very beginning, I found a story that had been totally forgotten from the early 60s, I think 1964, where a Cuban woman comes to the C.I.A. and says, listen, I think that my husband, I got this anonymous letter, my husband has been at a training camp for Manuel Artime, who was a doctor who led the Bay of Pigs Brigade 5206 or the MRR [Movimiento de Recuperación Revolucionaria], there were various words for the group that launched the attack.

Manuel Artime was the sort of charismatic leader of this group. He was also very controversial. And this woman says, listen, my husband’s disappeared, I haven’t heard from him. He was recruited by Artime to go to Nicaragua to train for an invasion and overthrow of Castro.

But I’m told that he was killed. And indeed, what they discovered is that he had been, it was an inside job and he had been killed because he was complaining about the fact that Artime wasn’t actually training anyone to do any invasions, overthrow Castro; he was training them to smuggle contraband.

And at the time, it was whiskey and clothing, it was not narcotics that they were accused of smuggling. But very quickly, by 1971, there’s this massive drug bust, 150 drug traffickers, the 150 of the biggest drug traffickers in America all get arrested on a single day. [Operation Eagle, June 21-22, 1970 with 135 arrests.] And what do you know, maybe 70 percent of them are Bay of Pigs veterans. [Many of those arrested were part of the C.I.A.’s anti-Castro Operation 40.]

So, one of the Bay of Pigs veterans in the cocaine trafficking, in the drug trafficking scene, not arrested that day is a guy named Guillermo Tabraue. I’m probably mispronouncing that, but Tabraue had probably been a criminal before the revolution. I found an old clipping of him getting arrested for a car theft, as part of a car theft enterprise in Havana in 1959.

He ran a jewelry store that was extremely popular and they sold stolen jewelry. And the jewelry store was renowned for giving police officers and judges very, very good prices on gold cufflinks and Rolex watches. So this was a very popular jewelry store. And at some point he signs up to be a D.E.A./C.I.A. informant.

And because the D.E.A. has just been established [it was established in 1973 and was principally the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs (BNDD) before that], they realize that, shit, all of these C.I.A. affiliated Bay of Pigs veterans are in the cocaine trafficking and heroin trafficking business now, we’d better figure out what they’re up to.

And a gentleman from the C.I.A. comes in and says, I can handle that. I’ll set up a little agency inside this new D.E.A. and I will make sure that we know everything about what the Bay of Pigs veterans are doing in the drug trafficking community. [The C.I.A. had been involved with drug enforcement since the 1950s. ]

Prisoners of Brigade 2506 guarded by Cuban Fidelistas in the wake of the Bay of Pigs invasion, 1961. (Miguel Vinas / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)

So Tabraue signs up as an informant for this guy. And at the same time, he gets into trafficking marijuana and soon after, cocaine through the jewelry store and he also has an unlicensed abortion clinic. He’s got a few different… and then later his son comes in and starts the pet store. And this is the enterprise and it’s connected to just an unbelievable array of Bay of Pigs-veterans-run trafficking organizations.

Later, people associated with this, Artime has this accounting whiz kid protege who he trains in these… he sets up this like money laundering sort-of university where he trains this kid in hotel rooms and the kid doesn’t know the names of his instructors or anything, but this guy goes on to become the Medellin Cartel’s lead accountant. So it’s this unbelievable cast of characters.

Very quickly after, the C.I.A. is always talking, they’re always writing memos about how they need to cut these guys loose. But what they really became was this sort of secret police deep state of Latin America. One of these characters is a guy named Félix Rodríguez. He remained a C.I.A. asset, I think. I mean, he’s still alive too, which is saying something, because a lot of these guys have been murdered.

And Félix Rodríguez is a real kind of rich and prolific character in the history of Latin America.

Chris Hedges: Well, let me just interrupt since I met him during the war in El Salvador. He was disguised as a Bolivian captain when they captured Che Guevara, was there for the execution of Che, and he used to show us his wristwatch and tell us that he’d taken it off the body of Che Guevara.

And this was during the whole Iran-Contra [affair], which we’ll get into, but I want to just stop and go back to Rubio. 

You write that Rubio’s approval ratings, you’re writing about how they’re the highest in the Republican Party, but you write, “even as he is the architect of what is arguably Trump’s single most cynical policy, the scheme to appoint drug cartel bosses and their cronies atop the governments of every Latin American country in the name of fighting drug cartels.”

And then you go on,

“In September, Rubio hailed Ecuadorean President Daniel Noboa, who leads a country whose homicide rate has risen eightfold since 2016, as an “incredibly willing partner” who “has done more just in the last couple years to take the fight to these narco-terrorists and these threats to the security and stability of Ecuador than any previous administration.”

Just five months earlier, a damning investigation revealed that Noboa’s family fruit business had trafficked 700 kilos of cocaine to Europe in banana crates between 2020 and 2022. 

Rubio has tirelessly promoted the cause of convicted (alas, just-pardoned) drug trafficker Juan Orlando Hernández. In 2018, Rubio personally and publicly commended Hernández, then president of Honduras, for combating drug traffickers (and supporting Israel), just seven months before his brother was indicted for trafficking 158 tons of cocaine in containers stamped ‘TH,” for Tony Hernández.

Former U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo poses for a photo with Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez at the U.S. Department of State in Washington, D.C., on June 18, 2018. (Wikimedia Commons / State Department photo/ Public Domain)

Rubio has raved about the crime-fighting efforts of Salvadoran and Argentine junior strongmen Nayib Bukele and Javier Milei, in spite of the former’s documented alliance with MS-13 and the various Miami cocaine trafficking scandals that enveloped his libertarian political party last fall, as well as both leaders’ slavish devotion to the drug cartels’ single favorite mode of money laundering

Rubio has been one of the Beltway’s biggest backers of newly elected Chilean president José Antonio Kast, the son of a literal Nazi war criminal who has spent his entire political career lionizing, whitewashing  and promising a restoration of the brutal reign of Augusto Pinochet, who personally ordered the Chilean army to build a cocaine laboratory, consolidated the narcotics trade inside his terrifying secret police and then allegedly “disappeared” key conspirators like his secret police chemist Eugenio Berríos.

And for at least a decade, Rubio has lauded, strategized with, and viciously condemned the multitude of criminal investigations into former Colombian President Alvaro Uribe, whom some describe as a kind of Kissingerian figure to the former Florida senator.

I just want to read that because Rubio has, for years and years and years calling for the overthrow of [Hugo] Chávez and [Nicolás] Maduro, made these alliances with a variety of figures who the D.E.A. and other agencies have investigated and found to be huge drug traffickers.

Maureen Tkacik: Indeed. And again, this is not my area of expertise, I come into writing about Latin America in a very circuitous fashion. But when you examine the evidence, it’s shocking. It’s not shocking to you, you covered Iran-Contra. But I grew up thinking, initially, that C.I.A. involvement in cocaine was some sort of conspiracy theory.

And then I did a little bit of research and realized, oh no, the C.I.A. did traffic cocaine. That happened, there are various excuses and reasons for that but not really that like the C.I.A. and its assets veritably invented cocaine trafficking, really that you must be intelligence affiliated to kind of play in this game.

And the right wing in Latin America, it’s so unbelievably cynical. It makes your head spin. But that the major drug traffickers are fascist right-wing jerks and just who you would think would be involved in such a predatory and destructive industry as narcotics. There you go. And all of what’s really, really surprising to me and I understand that I think to do business in Latin America, in order to be a politician in Latin America, you have to deal with this being one of your industries.

These are the power brokers in your region and you have to contend with them. You can’t sort of pretend that they don’t exist and you can’t put them all away. They are more powerful than you will ever be. But it is the cynicism, and it’s also something that, because of the recently published Fort Bragg Cartel, in which…

Chris Hedges: This is Seth Harp’s book, which I interviewed him [on], but the book is amazing. Yeah, you can explain just a little bit.

Maureen Tkacik: In that book, which is not about Latin America, it’s about Afghanistan, he really digs into, he expresses the similar sense of awe that he felt upon discovering that everything that we had ever said, that we had ever heard about the Taliban trafficking heroin was the opposite of reality.

The Taliban, that was the source of almost all of their popular support, was that they had clamped down on that industry because it was not popular for the reasons that there are destructive industries and addictive narcotics are probably the most destructive and they’re not popular with anyone.

But the Taliban had successfully sort of eradicated that industry in Afghanistan, then we come in, we overthrow the Taliban, and what do you know, the poppies are back like never before.

A U.S. Marine greeting local children working in an opium poppy field in Helmand Province, 2011. (ISAF / Wikimedia Commons / Public domain)

Chris Hedges: Well, Hamid Karzai, who was our puppet, and his brother controlled 90 percent of the heroin trade. And what Seth documents in his book is how Delta Force and these other elite units came back, essentially, and started dealing, they could ship the drugs over easily, started dealing drugs all up and down the eastern seaboard.

Maureen Tkacik: And he also documents this really systematic effort by the D.E.A. to suppress the evidence that this is happening. So, they’re saying, hey, look, we’ve tested the heroin and absolutely no heroin from Afghanistan is coming into America. It’s all from Mexico or it’s all from here. And those kinds of efforts that are made to conceal and distort what is plainly happening that everybody knows is also really quite astonishing.

And in the earlier days of the D.E.A., the agency had, I think, I’m not sure, but it seems like the agency had a lot more folks working for it who understood that their relationship with the C.I.A. was going to be adversarial and that in order to like actually eradicate drugs, they were gonna come up against some very powerful people within their own government.

Like that was sort of understood. I think by now the D.E.A. is just fully in on it. But I felt a similar… When he’s been given a lot of interviews describing how rigorously he fact-checked his thesis because the propaganda was so… the certainty was among all of the chattering classes that… it’s sort of like, “Maduro is a terrible, ruthless killer.” So many people will tell you this with all the conviction you could muster, but you don’t really ever know where it comes from.

And in this case, it was the same. We accused the Taliban of being drug traffickers. We were the drug traffickers. And as soon as the Taliban takes charge, they get rid of the drug traffickers, and that’s why we hate them. And that’s why they hate us.

Chris Hedges: Well, we also occupied their country for 20 years. I want to talk about Iran-Contra, which I did cover, because it was during the [Ronald] Reagan administration, and Reagan was having trouble getting funds approved. The Congress was more adversarial. Now it’s completely supine, of course.

And so they set up this system of trafficking drugs to fund the Contras. Edén Pastora, who was a renegade Contra leader operating out of Northern Costa Rica, I knew him as well, was very involved in this, as was Félix Rodríguez, who went by the pseudonym Max Gómez. But talk about that, because it’s an important moment where you’re, in essence, really setting up this infrastructure which continues.

Maureen Tkacik: Sure, I would just like to say the infrastructure did predate Iran-Contra. One of the reasons that these gentlemen have been so resilient in our deep state is because they funded their own, they self-funded their operations. So the Church Committee happens, the C.I.A. endures all of these scandals in the 1970s. You wanna do some covert ops, who are you gonna call?

This was happening very early. Artime was getting in all of these scandals. There was the woman whose husband had been murdered. There was also, he had this wife who was maybe a bit of a prostitute. She’d been the mistress of [Fulgencio] Batista and some other big dictators and she’d also posed for smut, lesbian smut.

And so they send him off to Nicaragua and he sets up a base there. This is sort of the start of this Black Ops regional dirty army that does a lot of coke trafficking, but they also sort of form militias. And there’s something called Operation Condor, which actually turns out to be two things, but maybe they are the same. And it supposedly started with Pinochet and the Argentinian…

Chris Hedges: It was three countries that united to fight communism, led perhaps by Argentina and Chile, right? Operation Condor?

Maureen Tkacik: Yes, so that is the one that most people know and supposedly launched in 1975. But I was speaking to a scholar of this stuff who was saying, really, it started with the murder of Che Guevara posing as a Bolivian colonel. But Félix Rodríguez, this Bay of Pigs veteran and this sort of long-time C.I.A. asset, and he also, he not only took Guevara’s Rolex, but apparently he would brag that he had cut off his finger and sent it to Fidel Castro.

C.I.A. agent Felix Rodriguez, left, with Che Guevara, center, before Guevara was executed in Bolivia, in 1967. (AP Photo / Courtesy of Felix Rodriguez / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)

So I’ve been told that, this is in 1967, this is sort of the soft launch of Operation Condor and the beginning of this kind of like cooperation between all of these right-wing forces throughout Latin America.

There’s another Operation Condor in Mexico that started in the early 70s that was a crackdown. It was a specifically sort of D.E.A.-Mexican military project that cracked down on marijuana farmers.

And this was… I don’t know if they were the same thing but it had some of the same effects. It was this real crackdown on left wing sort of guerrilla movements, labor organizers. It was very easy for them to get sort of rounded up in this blitz to eradicate marijuana throughout Mexico.

So, all together we see an enormous amount of cooperation. A lot of it is orchestrated by the C.I.A. Pinochet at some point comes in and does some things that the C.I.A. supposedly doesn’t know about.

I read one interesting passage about how the C.I.A. wasn’t really on board with Operation Condor. They weren’t entirely behind it and they were very, very intent on making sure that it wasn’t headquartered in Miami because that would have been the obvious place to headquarter such a mission. But all of these guys funded their operations by trafficking massive quantities of drugs.

And this is something that like there is on the left, I think there’s this sort of conventional wisdom. This public intellectual, Michael Massing, he’s got a Genius Grant, he’s written a few books on drug policy. And his line on Gary Webb was always like, it didn’t really matter that the C.I.A. was…

Chris Hedges: Let me just interrupt for people that don’t know, Gary Webb was the reporter who really broke the story, he did break the story of the shipment of cocaine by Contras and C.I.A.-affiliated operatives into American cities like Oakland. The press, the establishment press, worked overtime, including, I was at the New York Times, to discredit him.

They discredited him not by going down and checking on his reporting or trying to re-report what he did, but by getting background briefings at the C.I.A., and then he ultimately committed suicide.

Maureen Tkacik: Yes, and with the benefit of hindsight, it is absolutely mind-blowing to read any of the reports from Iran-Contra or a lot of the sources that I used in this story just came from some of the collections of declassified JFK files, right? Because these guys also were deeply involved in that assassination and others. You can look up, anybody who was a Cuban exile in Miami in the 60s, you can probably see if they’ve had any prominence.

You can probably find some information about them in these files. But anyway, you look at the evidence that was just known by the end of the 80s about the C.I.A. involvement and the Contra involvement in drug trafficking and this wasn’t new news. [Robert Parry, the founder of Consortium News, first broke the story for the Associated Press of Contra involvement in the drug trade.]

One thing that Gary Webb really, a connection that he really nailed down was the connection between the drug dealers that really first popularized crack in the… I think Rick Ross was the name of one of them in 1985, because when crack hit, I mean, it hit, it changed everything. When I started writing for newspapers in the mid-late nineties, crack was still people under the influence, it [was] the source of a lot of violence in cities.

It was a drug that really had just a devastating effect on already devastated American cities. And he nailed down the connection between this C.I.A., this just massive supply of cheap drugs and this desperation to find new customers for this stuff. And to do that, they had to go to people who had way less money than your average cocaine consumer. And that’s what they did with it. This supply matters.

You know, there’s this idea that the only way you can really fight drug addiction and the scourge of illegal drugs is by working on the demand. And there’s an element of truth to that. It makes a lot of sense. But the fact is, our government’s run by drug traffickers, our institutions of power. And that’s one of the reasons, look at what the Sacklers did. That was a supply side addiction epidemic.

And we allow these things for whatever reason, but the evidence was absolutely overwhelming that the C.I.A., that the highest levels of the American intelligence apparatus were deeply involved. And even that, there’s a documentary that came out recently that has a lot of quite a few D.E.A. and other intelligence officers from the 1980s saying that Félix Rodríguez himself, remember this character who assassinated Che Guevara, Bay of Pigs veteran…

Chris Hedges: He didn’t actually assassinate Guevara. It was a Bolivian soldier shot, but he was there. Just as a small point, he was there.

Maureen Tkacik: He cut his finger off after he was dead.

Chris Hedges: Well, no, he sent the… He is assassinated in the sense that they ordered, they determined that there was no way Che was going to — he was captured alive, of course — was going to live, but he didn’t actually pull the trigger. They got some poor Bolivian soldier to do it. That’s just a small footnote. You can read Jon Lee Anderson’s great book on Che.

Maureen Tkacik: Sorry. But Félix Rodríguez is supposedly now, according to these folks, the guy who actually ordered the murder, the torture and subsequent murder of a D.E.A. agent who had sort of run afoul of it had become sort of a whistleblower named Kiki Camarena.

Chris Hedges: This is Kiki Camarena.

Maureen Tkacik: Yeah, and that is something that the cartels had long sort of been blamed for. Now somebody tried to, I think, sue the Netflix documentarian for defamation, but Félix Rodríguez, who’s still alive and still kicking, indeed, recently hosted none other than Álvaro Uribe, former Colombian Prime Minister and good, good friend of Marco Rubio at a Bay of Pigs reunion event.

So Félix Rodríguez is still a figure of some prominence in Miami. He’s got a lot of blood on his hands, allegedly and not allegedly and by his own testimony. But this is the type of guy who is sort of in the milieu of this crew that ran this drug trafficking organization that Marco Rubio’s brother-in-law had sort of ascended relatively to the number two spot in essentially.

Another thing that is interesting about Rubio’s own biography is that he has said that his father trained at 18, I forget where, but he trained in some training camp in Central America to — this would have been back in the 40s — for a mission that never came off to overthrow and possibly assassinate [Rafael] Trujillo, the 30 year dictator of the Dominican Republic, who was sort of a C.I.A. asset and then sort of a C.I.A. thorn in its side for many years.

So I don’t know, that’s the only sign I’ve ever gotten that Rubio’s own family was involved in any of this stuff. His family came to Miami before the revolution, escaping Batista, and then subsequently would move back and forth, trying to kind of scrape some money together because I don’t think that anybody in his family was particularly privileged.

Rubio would change all that. And one thing that’s really also fascinating is that the prosecutor that prosecuted his brother-in-law and the entire drug trafficking organization, then the following year prosecuted Manuel Noriega in a really fascinating trial that is another one of these unbelievable windows into the C.I.A. involvement in drug trafficking.

Because Noriega’s defense attorney, and a lot of evidence was suppressed in this case, but his defense attorney was constantly cross-examining various government witnesses saying like, okay, wasn’t the C.I.A. paying Noriega this whole time as well? And Noriega claimed that he’d made $10 million cooperating with the C.I.A. over the years.

Panamanian military leader Manuel Noriega in a 1990 mugshot taken after his capture by U.S. forces. (U.S. Marshals Service / Wikimedia Commons / Public Domain)

They never had any problem with him facilitating money laundering. And that’s the other thing, so there’s a lot of rich history. That prosecutor then, his wife, gives Rubio his first job literally like the year after the indictment. I think that this might still be going on during the trial or directly after the trial. The prosecutor’s wife, Ileana Ros[-Lehtinen], God, what is this last name? I can never… she’s a giant in the Congress in Miami, a good friend of Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

And her father was another Cuban exile deeply involved in Voice of America, I believe [he hosted shows for U.S.-funded Radio y Televisión Martí.] But this congresswoman gave Marco Rubio an internship when he got out of high school. They were very early on, it was decided that he was sort of a preternatural political talent. His ties to drug traffickers never stopped Marco Rubio, but he is very sensitive about the story, he really went on a little jihad against Univision when they broke the story.

And it’s just not really necessarily part of the conventional wisdom of who he is. And I think it’s important not because I would accuse Marco Rubio of being involved in drug trafficking himself, but understanding the landscape of social capital, not to sound annoying, in Miami in the 1980s to understand how intertwined right-wing politics and drug trafficking are in that community and how sort of this cognitive dissonance is just something that everybody lives and breathes down there.

Drug crimes are only illegal when the wrong people are committing them and that is something that is understood in, I think, throughout Latin America that we don’t seem to comprehend.

Chris Hedges: Yeah, you succinctly write,

“Drug traffickers who were allied with the C.I.A.’s ideological objectives were protected, assisted and/or recruited as assets, while drug traffickers who bribed or cooperated with leftists, crossed the Agency, or outlived their usefulness were set up for prosecution or discarded.”

That’s precisely correct. And I want to also mention, and you may have heard this, but the common understanding is that Maduro, like [Claudia] Sheinbaum in Mexico, was fairly clean.

Maureen Tkacik: Oh my god, yes. I have read the indictment against Maduro. There are episodes, it’s a strange document. Nothing like the indictment of Juan Orlando Hernández, which is very, it’s a classic indictment. The evidence is there. You see it. I don’t know how the grand jury that… I could see a Florida grand jury going for this, but it’s not very strong.

And one of the things, one of the pieces of evidence, one of the passages that was most bizarre to me was this, they have a section about toward this 2013 drug bust, the biggest drug bust in the drug seizure in the history of commercial air travel was 2013 Charles de Gaulle Airport, probably one of the biggest, most busiest airports in the world — 1.3 tons of cocaine are found in 33 suitcases in this Air France flight from Caracas.

Immediately Maduro, who is very new, Chavez has just died, he’s just taken over, he has 25 airport security and sort of military officers who are involved in the airport operation arrested. And then this strange British guy gets arrested for having claimed on a wiretap that he was the actual owner of the 1.3 tons of cocaine.

He’s a very strange figure, supposedly a big crime boss in the U.K., but he’s never really been written about before that except for some very strange harassment charges, doesn’t seem particularly bright.

And his lawyer claims, and then he later claims, no, he was just saying that the coke was his on the wiretap to get them off his back. I don’t understand. I’ve been meaning to kind of look into this a little bit more closely, but it seems like it was some sort of setup, this whole thing. It’s a very strange way to try and traffic cocaine, just putting it into suitcases in a commercial airliner that is destined for the busiest passenger airport in the world.

Something about that is a little off to me. The whole thing is a little off. And there was never any suggestion that Maduro had any involvement or knowledge in that. And at the time, none of the investigations revealed anything of the sort. But it’s used in this, it’s deployed in this indictment as like this sign of what an unbelievably prodigious drug trafficker Maduro is. So a lot of it is stuff like that.

There’s something about Malaysian heating oil. The fact is that commerce itself in Venezuela is mostly criminalized because of the severity of the sanctions that we’ve imposed over the years on that country.

I think that we almost feel like, as you see with the blowing up the oil tankers, there’s this sense of entitlement that we have to sort of get our way with Venezuela because we’ve literally criminalized most of the economic activity that that country is involved in.

Another thing about Maduro is that he has two nephews who were apparently arrested for narco trafficking a few years back and they sort of claimed that they were framed.

President Nicolás Maduro, 2016. (Cancillería del Ecuador via Flickr)

President Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela, 2016. (Cancillería del Ecuador via Flickr)

They don’t seem particularly intelligent. They were trying to do a drug deal so that they could get some money to win, I think, the 2018 election. But this massive quantity of cocaine apparently was found in their room at La Romana, I think that’s what it’s called. It’s a resort in the Dominican Republic. It’s owned by the Fanjul family.

One Bob Menendez in 2013 claimed that he was, that the Fanjul family was trying to set him up by sending whores to his villa at La Romana. It just triggered something in my mind, like, hmm, I wonder if there’s something to that. I wonder if that cocaine they found really belonged to the narco-nephews. What’s really going on there? I wanna delve a lot more deeply into this, but the indictment against him, I don’t understand how they think…

Now, Miami, if they were trying him in Miami, he might be a dead man. But in New York, are they going to get a conviction in New York? On this? It seems absurd.

Chris Hedges: I want to go back to Rubio. You’re right, when Marco Rubio maligns the efficacy of interdiction and other traditional law enforcement approaches to mitigating narco trafficking in favor of military operations, as he did in a recent speech on Trump’s speedboat bombings, he is contradicting every empirical evaluation of drug war efficacy that exists, yes.

But he is also pining for a kind of Cold War-era blanket license to commit dirty war in the name of some bigger goal. I was telling you before we went into the interview that I was in Argentina at the end of the dirty war.

Of course, Carter had imposed some sanctions, which Reagan lifted, a full-throated support under the Reagan administration for this junta, which disappeared 30,000 of its own citizens. But it was common knowledge that in police stations there were large industrial-sized freezers full of cocaine.

And when we talk about that dirty war, that nexus, which I think you capture in the story between drug trafficking and the desaparecidos, the killing of labor union leaders, student leaders, they’re intimately intertwined.

Maureen Tkacik: There’s a book called Powderburns, I believe, by a former D.E.A. agent, recalling his odyssey of being rat fucked by C.I.A. guys in his efforts to combat drug trafficking in Latin America in the 80s and early 90s. And at one point he recalls a few conversations where somebody’s like, well, the war on drugs is important, but the war on communism is even more important.

And he’s like, where are you from? Because I’m from, I forget, I’m from a city that’s been devastated by deindustrialization and now is being brought to its knees by addiction. I’m not a fan of communism, but I don’t really think that it’s a threat to my society. He just describes how he was not able to understand that rationalization. But now we’re using the drug war as its own, as the same sort of blanket license.

And what it really is, I guess, is the same as the Cold War, is this country has decided to threaten… This is another thing, there’s so much talk about the oil curse, and it is true. I grew up, a lot of my youth I spent in China, my dad was in the State Department, and I always wondered, gosh, the Taiwanese, they had a lobby just like the Miami lobby, the Cuba lobby and the Zionist lobby, they have the China lobby.

And they trafficked drugs and they were bad guys and they were right-wing. But at some point, maybe they switched drugs for bicycles and then semiconductors and they started to build factories in China even though they were technically at war and those two places are very interdependent right now.

There’s a lot of parallels that we like to make, but why were they allowed? Why was China allowed to build an industrial economy? And why did we allow our agents in Taiwan to facilitate this? Would they have been even able to do it if they hadn’t sort of all done it in Taiwan first and they had the language, yada yada? It’s just such a different story.

And it seems like part of the benefit that China had other than its 1 billion people was that they didn’t have any resources to exploit. It had to be their human capital, as they like to say in the business. But, we do not allow countries with resources to nationalize those resources in hopes of trying to nationalize the surpluses that they might bring and then diversify their economy into something more sustainable.

The resource curse is something that countless nations, obviously Libya, Iran, Venezuela, Russia have all tried to sort of reverse and figure out how to deal with and whenever they do, they feel our wrath. And so it really pisses me off when pundits talk about the resource curse as though it’s not really the sort of gratuitous sanctions for having the temerity to threaten hegemony curse.

Chris Hedges

Well, that’s how [Allende] was overthrown in ‘73. It was at the service of Anaconda Copper. It’s how [Jacobo] Árbenz was overthrown in ‘54 in Guatemala on behalf of United Fruit. As soon as you go, and that’s what’s happening with Venezuela. Trump, unlike previous presidents, was quite open about it. It’s about the oil, the largest reserves of oil in the world.

And the article is smart and good and people should read it, “The Narco-Terrorist Elite.” It’s in The American Prospect, where Moe works as the investigative editor. It’s really a fine piece of journalism and important for understanding what’s driving this policy and who Marco Rubio is. Thank you, Moe.

Maureen Tkacik: Thank you so much. It’s an honor.

Chris Hedges: And thanks to Victor [Padilla], Diego [Ramos], Max [Jones], Sofia [Menemenlis] and Thomas [Hedges], who produced the show. You can find me at ChrisHedges.Substack.com.

Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist who was a foreign correspondent for 15 years for The New York Times, where he served as the Middle East bureau chief and Balkan bureau chief for the paper. He previously worked overseas for The Dallas Morning News, The Christian Science Monitor and NPR.  He is the host of show “The Chris Hedges Report.”

Una guía integral del imperialismo en la agresión a Venezuela

Alejandro Pedregal, columnista de la revista española El Salto 

El secuestro del presidente venezolano Nicolás Maduro y de su esposa, Cilia Flores, a manos del imperialismo estadounidense marca una nueva y gravísima escalada en la agresión sostenida contra la soberanía de Venezuela. Lejos de tratarse de un hecho aislado o excepcional, este episodio se inscribe en una ofensiva prolongada que combina guerra económica y financiera, deslegitimación política, coerción militar y producción de consenso mediático y hegemonía cultural. 

Frente a la confusión informativa, la propaganda y la proliferación de narrativas especulativas, este artículo propone un marco de análisis para comprender la lógica estructural del imperialismo contemporáneo y situar este ataque en el contexto del asedio que Venezuela viene sufriendo desde hace décadas.

Imperialismo y sistema-mundo capitalista: un marco de análisis

Desde la perspectiva del análisis de sistemas-mundo, el capitalismo no se entiende como una suma de economías nacionales aisladas, sino como una totalidad histórica estructurada por relaciones jerárquicas de dominación y dependencia, articuladas a través del intercambio desigual. 

En este marco, el imperialismo no constituye una deformación coyuntural ni el resultado excepcional de crisis o guerras concretas, sino la dimensión constitutiva del sistema-mundo capitalista, inseparable de su lógica histórica de expansión y de su necesidad permanente de acumulación a escala global.

El imperialismo puede definirse, así, como el modo jerárquico mediante el cual se organiza la captura, transferencia y apropiación del valor en el mundo. Este proceso se basa en la subordinación estructural de unas sociedades a otras dentro de una división internacional de la producción y el trabajo que separa a los países que no retienen el valor que producen de aquellos que lo capturan y concentran gracias al intercambio desigual. 

Esta jerarquización configura los polos clásicos del sistema —centro y periferia, o Norte y Sur global—, así como espacios intermedios de semiperiferia, donde coexisten dinámicas contradictorias de apropiación y dependencia. El imperialismo, en este sentido, segrega y ordena el mundo para garantizar la acumulación de capital, apoyándose en la extracción barata de trabajo, bienes materiales y energía, y en la externalización sistemática de costes hacia la periferia.

Lejos de reducirse a la dominación militar directa o al control territorial, el imperialismo contemporáneo opera como un sistema integrado que articula distintas esferas de la vida social

Lejos de reducirse a la dominación militar directa o al control territorial, el imperialismo contemporáneo opera como un sistema integrado que articula distintas esferas de la vida social. La dominación económica —basada en el control de los flujos de valor, el endeudamiento, las sanciones o el acceso a los mercados— se ve reforzada por instrumentos políticos y diplomáticos, por la amenaza o el uso efectivo de la coerción militar, y por formas de hegemonía cultural y mediática que contribuyen a legitimar el orden existente en el imaginario social. 

Estos ámbitos no funcionan de manera compartimentada, sino que se combinan y retroalimentan en distintos grados de coerción y consenso, buscando un equilibrio que permita naturalizar la subordinación imperialista y normalizar la captura de valor como un hecho inevitable o incluso deseable.

La participación activa de los Estados es clave en esta arquitectura de dominación. A través de marcos legales, acuerdos internacionales, dispositivos diplomáticos y, llegado el caso, el uso de la fuerza militar, se crean las condiciones para que las corporaciones transnacionales y las entidades financieras concentren la mayor parte de los beneficios del comercio global. 

En este contexto, puede hablarse de Estados imperialistas, fundamentalmente situados en el centro del sistema-mundo capitalista, frente a otros Estados cuya inserción estructural es de dependencia, independientemente de sus proyectos políticos internos o de sus aspiraciones de desarrollo. Las distintas fases históricas del imperialismo —colonial, neocolonial y neoliberal— muestran continuidades y rupturas en estas formas de dominación, generalmente asociadas a periodos de hegemonía de potencias concretas, siendo Estados Unidos el actor central del imperialismo contemporáneo.

Este marco permite analizar el caso venezolano no como una anomalía ni como un conflicto estrictamente interno, sino como una expresión concreta de las tensiones del sistema-mundo capitalista y de las formas contemporáneas de agresión imperialista. 

Las dinámicas económicas, políticas, diplomáticas, mediáticas, culturales y militares que han atravesado Venezuela en las últimas décadas, hasta desembocar en la abierta intervención militar de estos días contraria al derecho internacional, solo pueden comprenderse plenamente si se las sitúa dentro de esta lógica estructural de dominación, captura de valor y disciplinamiento de la periferia.

Venezuela en el engranaje del imperialismo contemporáneo

Situar el caso venezolano dentro del marco del sistema-mundo capitalista implica abandonar explicaciones excepcionalistas o moralizantes y entenderlo como una expresión concreta de las dinámicas estructurales del imperialismo contemporáneo. 

Lejos de tratarse de un mero conflicto bilateral, de un “fracaso interno” o de una supuesta “deriva autoritaria”, la agresión sostenida contra Venezuela debe leerse como parte de un proceso de disciplinamiento de la periferia en un contexto de crisis, reconfiguración geopolítica y declive relativo de la hegemonía estadounidense.

Desde el inicio del proceso bolivariano, la soberanía venezolana fue objeto de una confrontación sostenida por parte del imperialismo estadounidense y sus aliados regionales. Ya durante la presidencia de Hugo Chávez (1999–2013), esta ofensiva adoptó múltiples formas que anticipan los mecanismos hoy desplegados contra Venezuela. El golpe de Estado de abril de 2002 —respaldado por sectores empresariales, mediáticos y militares, y legitimado de facto por Washington— marcó un punto de inflexión, seguido pocos meses después por el paro petrolero de 2002–2003, un sabotaje económico dirigido a paralizar PDVSA y asfixiar al Estado venezolano. 

A estos episodios se sumaron operaciones de desestabilización política y financiera, como el financiamiento de la oposición a través de agencias estadounidenses (USAID y NED), la presión internacional durante el referéndum revocatorio de 2004, y la detección de tramas paramilitares vinculadas a Colombia, como la llamada Operación Daktari en 2004. 

En las últimas décadas (y de forma particularmente intensa desde mediados de los años 2010) Venezuela ha sido objeto de un incremento en esta estrategia multiforme de dominación,

Estos hechos se inscribieron, además, en un entorno regional crecientemente militarizado, con la expansión de la presencia estadounidense en Colombia y la realización de ejercicios militares que simulaban escenarios de intervención en Venezuela, que incluyen el precedente de la Operación Balboa en 2001, liderada por España en coordinación con Colombia, Panamá y Estados Unidos. 

Paralelamente, se consolidó una guerra mediática internacional orientada a erosionar la legitimidad del gobierno bolivariano y a preparar el terreno simbólico para formas más abiertas del uso de la fuerza. Lejos de constituir episodios aislados, estos precedentes revelan una estrategia prolongada de injerencia que combina presión económica, conspiración política, amenaza militar y disciplinamiento discursivo, y que encuentra su continuidad —con medios más radicalizados— en la fase actual de agresión imperialista contra Venezuela.

Así pues, en las últimas décadas —y de forma particularmente intensa desde mediados de los años 2010— Venezuela ha sido objeto de un incremento en esta estrategia multiforme de dominación, en la que se han combinado sanciones económicas, asfixia financiera, deslegitimación diplomática, operaciones de desestabilización política, amenazas militares, acciones encubiertas y una intensa guerra mediática y cultural. 

Esta articulación de instrumentos responde con claridad a los automatismos del imperialismo descritos anteriormente: un equilibrio relativo entre coerción y consenso destinado a forzar un cambio de régimen con el fin de imponer la sumisión del país a los circuitos de acumulación del capital global.

El eje económico ha sido central en esta ofensiva. Tras la desestabilización interna provocada por las guarimbas en 2014 —que acompañaron al incremento de la financiación directa de Estados Unidos a la oposición—, desde 2015, y de forma cualitativamente más agresiva a partir de 2017 y 2019, las sanciones unilaterales estadounidenses, contrarias al derecho internacional, no solo han castigado severamente la capacidad del Estado venezolano para comerciar, financiarse y sostener políticas públicas, sino que han funcionado como un mecanismo de guerra económica orientado a erosionar las condiciones materiales de reproducción social. 

Las sanciones financieras impuestas en 2017 bloquearon el acceso a los mercados internacionales de crédito e impidieron la refinanciación de la deuda, mientras que el embargo petrolero de facto instaurado en 2019 contra PDVSA, acompañado de la confiscación de activos estratégicos en el exterior, profundizó el colapso de los ingresos públicos y de la capacidad de importación del país.

Estudios del Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) estimaron que, solo entre 2017 y 2018, las sanciones contribuyeron a 40.000 muertes evitables en Venezuela

Las consecuencias materiales de este estrangulamiento han sido ampliamente documentadas. Estudios del Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) estimaron que, solo entre 2017 y 2018, las sanciones contribuyeron a 40.000 muertes evitables, al restringir el acceso a alimentos, medicamentos, insumos hospitalarios y servicios básicos, mientras otros estudios elevaron esta cifra a más de 100.000 hasta 2020. Informes de agencias de Naciones Unidas han constatado el deterioro sostenido de los indicadores de salud, nutrición y mortalidad infantil y materna en el contexto del colapso económico inducido. 

En 2018, un funcionario del propio Departamento de Estado de Estados Unidos reconocía abiertamente el objetivo de esta política al afirmar que las sanciones habían forzado a Venezuela a entrar en default y que el “colapso total” era la prueba de que la estrategia estaba funcionando.

Este proceso de asfixia económica ha ido acompañado de una desposesión financiera directa, en la que han participado activamente instituciones de los países centrales. El caso del oro venezolano retenido por el Banco de Inglaterra resulta particularmente ilustrativo. Bajo el argumento de “no saber quién es el gobierno legítimo”, el Reino Unido se negó a devolver reservas soberanas pertenecientes al Estado venezolano, incluso en plena emergencia del covid. De forma paralela, activos estatales por valor de decenas de miles de millones de dólares fueron congelados en el exterior, y empresas estratégicas como Citgo quedaron bajo control judicial en Estados Unidos, privando al país de recursos fundamentales.

Este eje económico se articuló con una ofensiva política y diplomática destinada a negar la soberanía venezolana en el plano internacional. Tras el desconocimiento de las elecciones presidenciales de 2018, en enero de 2019 se produjo el reconocimiento inmediato por Estados Unidos, la Unión Europea y otros aliados de Juan Guaidó como autoridad paralela, sin haberse presentado ni tan siquiera a las elecciones presidenciales. 

Esto sería acompañada, un mes después, de un intento de entrada desde la frontera colombiana bajo el pretexto de la “ayuda humanitaria”. Estos episodios pusieron de manifiesto el papel desempeñado por gobiernos, organismos multilaterales y alianzas regionales en la elaboración de un consenso internacional para el cambio de régimen y la intervención, normalizando una interpretación notablemente elástica de la legalidad internacional en favor de los intereses del hegemón.

Cuando estas herramientas no produjeron los resultados esperados, la lógica imperialista recurrió a formas de acción más directas. En agosto de 2018 tuvo lugar el intento de asesinato de Nicolás Maduro

Cuando estas herramientas no produjeron los resultados esperados, la lógica imperialista recurrió a formas de acción más directas. En agosto de 2018 tuvo lugar el intento de asesinato del presidente Nicolás Maduro mediante drones con explosivos. En años posteriores, se intensificaron los despliegues navales estadounidenses en el Caribe, con incursiones mercenarias como la Operación Gedeón en mayo de 2020 y las recientes operaciones de interdicción bajo el argumento de la “guerra contra el narcotráfico”, que ha resultado en el asesinato extrajudicial y sin pruebas de más de un centenar de personas, de las que se sabe que muchas de ellas eran simples pescadores artesanales de la zona. 

En este contexto, la declaración del fentanilo como “arma de destrucción masiva” o la criminalización del Estado venezolano mediante narrativas como la del llamado Cartel de los Soles cumplieron con la función de construir un marco moral que legitimara la violencia imperialista ante la opinión pública. Resulta revelador que esta última acusación haya sido eliminada al iniciarse las audiencias judiciales contra Maduro, evidenciando su carácter instrumental y propagandístico.

Por supuesto, este dispositivo coercitivo no se sostiene únicamente mediante la fuerza. La producción de consenso ha sido igualmente clave. Para ello, ha proliferado la promoción internacional de liderazgos opositores, y los reconocimientos y dispositivos simbólicos de legitimación por medio del uso de premios institucionales, desde el Premio Sájarov de la Unión Europea a los ultraderechistas María Corina Machado y Edmundo González Urrutia hasta el Premio Nóbel a la primera o el novedoso sainete del Premio de la Paz de la FIFA a Donal Trump. 

A ello se ha unido una cobertura mediática sistemáticamente sesgada —con la reiteración acrítica de términos como “dictador”, “tirano”, “autárquico” o “régimen” en prensa generalista tanto como en prensa rosa o deportiva— para configurar una estrategia cultural destinada a naturalizar la intervención y a presentar el cambio de régimen como una causa deseable, humanitaria e incluso pacífica. Como en otros escenarios históricos, la hegemonía cultural funciona aquí como complemento indispensable de la coerción financiera y militar, haciendo de la agresión una parte central del sentido común político.

El crudo pesado venezolano adquiere una importancia específica, ya que podría servir para complementar las limitaciones del crudo ultraligero procedente del fracking estadounidense

Pero detrás de esta ofensiva no hay solo una voluntad de disciplinamiento, castigo o dominio en términos abstractos. Venezuela ocupa un lugar estratégico en la geografía material del capitalismo global, especialmente por sus reservas energéticas. Aunque el petróleo venezolano es ultrapesado y costoso de refinar, su relevancia no puede evaluarse al margen de la configuración actual del mercado energético global. 

Venezuela concentra unas de las mayores reservas probadas de crudo del planeta —en torno a los 300.000 millones de barriles, mayoritariamente en la Faja del Orinoco—, un volumen comparable o incluso superior al de grandes productores como Arabia Saudí o Irán, aunque sometido a condiciones geológicas y técnicas complejas. La fuerte caída de la producción —hoy situada en torno a los 900.000–1.100.000 barriles diarios frente a los más de tres millones alcanzados en su pico histórico—, respondería al efecto de las sanciones en la asfixia financiera del país y el consecuente deterioro deliberado en inversión e infraestructuras. 

En este contexto, el crudo pesado venezolano adquiere una importancia específica, ya que podría servir para complementar las limitaciones del crudo ultraligero procedente del fracking estadounidense que se estima insuficiente por sí solo para abastecer la demanda de diésel y otros destilados medios. Además, este petróleo venezolano encaja con la capacidad instalada de las grandes refinerías del Golfo de México, diseñadas precisamente para procesar crudos densos y con alto contenido en azufre. 

A ello se suma un factor logístico nada menor: la proximidad geográfica —unas 1.500–2.000 millas náuticas frente a las 8.000–10.000 desde Oriente Medio— reduce los costes de transporte (y, por tanto, de uso de crudo) y los riesgos de exposición a los potenciales cuellos de botella estratégicos en Ormuz, Suez o Bab el-Mandeb, en un escenario de creciente inestabilidad global. 

Esta combinación de reservas, calidad del crudo, infraestructura de refinación y geografía explica por qué el control territorial y logístico del petróleo venezolano, sin ser el único, sigue siendo un elemento de peso en las disputas geoeconómicas contemporáneas, más allá de los relatos coyunturales con los que se intenta justificar la agresión. Pero es que además, el control de estos recursos no solo tiene implicaciones energéticas, sino también financieras y monetarias, al ser parte de una política destinada a reforzar el papel del dólar en el comercio internacional energético con el fin de apuntalar una hegemonía en crisis.

Venezuela aparece como una plaza clave en un repliegue táctico más amplio de Estados Unidos hacia sus esferas de influencia (que incluye el esfuerzo por disciplinar a Europa, Japón y Corea del Sur)

En este sentido, Venezuela aparece como una plaza clave en un repliegue táctico más amplio de Estados Unidos hacia sus esferas de influencia (que incluye el esfuerzo por disciplinar a Europa, Japón y Corea del Sur), en un momento de transformación, combustión y disputa estratégica a escala mundial. 

No se trata únicamente de renovar la Doctrina Monroe por medio del “Corolario Trump” para reafirmar el viejo “patio trasero” —como los imperialistas estadounidenses menosprecian a América Latina—, sino de consolidar posiciones frente a posibles competidores sistémicos al tiempo que se afianzan dependencias y liberan recursos para el eje central de la confrontación geopolítica contemporánea. El caso venezolano, lejos de ser marginal, se inscribe así en el corazón de las contradicciones del imperialismo en su fase actual, cuando el centro del mismo percibe que ha perdido el control hegemónico sobre el resto.

Hechos frente a conspiraciones: la obligación estratégica de la información frente a la confusión mediática imperialista

El recorrido hasta aquí realizado permite extraer una conclusión fundamental: sin herramientas de análisis estructural, las agresiones imperialistas aparecen como hechos medio confusos, excepcionales o a veces inexplicables, que incluso parecen ser producto de actitudes magolómanas o ataques psicóticos. En realidad, responden a patrones históricos bien conocidos. 

Comprender el imperialismo como un sistema, y no como una suma de excesos, errores o conspiraciones aisladas, no es un ejercicio intelectual abstracto, sino una condición política imprescindible para poder identificar al agresor, nombrar la violencia y articular respuestas colectivas.

En contextos de crisis, zozobra y desinformación, esta tarea se vuelve aún más urgente. La ofensiva imperialista no se libra únicamente en los planos económico, diplomático o militar, sino también en el campo de la producción de conocimiento. 

Lo que circula masivamente en esos momentos no es información neutral, sino, en el mejor de los casos, propaganda: relatos diseñados para desorientar, fragmentar, sembrar sospechas y desplazar el foco desde los hechos comprobables hacia un terreno pantanoso de especulación permanente. 

El último de ellos ha sido el destinado a deslizar la posibilidad de que la hasta ahora vicepresidenta, y ahora presidenta encargada, Delcy Rodríguez, haya sido la figura que ha traicionado a Nicolás Maduro. Sin pruebas, sin datos, sin nada, la acusación ha permeado los debates de buena parte de una supuesta izquierda en redes sociales que, a merced de los algoritmos, que ni tan siquiera se ha atrevido cuestionar el origen de la tesis, a pesar haber sido propagada de manera profusa por el propio Donald Trump, los servicios de inteligencia estadounidenses y medios con sede en Miami. Esto pone en evidencia que, cuanto mayor es la capacidad de difusión mediática del hegemón, más eficaz resulta su estrategia de desinformación y confusión. 

Frente a una agresión imperialista que hace apenas unas décadas habría provocado movilizaciones masivas, hoy asistimos con demasiada frecuencia a una sustitución del análisis por teorías conspirativas recicladas

La especulación sin pruebas, la amplificación acrítica de narrativas fabricadas en centros de poder hostiles y la obsesión por tramas opacas terminan haciendo el juego al imperialismo, debilitando la capacidad de denuncia, erosionando la confianza política y fragmentando a quienes deberían estar construyendo respuestas comunes. 

Allí donde se necesita claridad, unidad y fuerza, se introduce confusión, sospecha y parálisis. No se trata de negar la complejidad de los procesos ni de clausurar el debate, sino de poner en cuarentena las narrativas que responden a intereses imperiales evidentes y de no convertir la incertidumbre en un mercado de rumores. La historia del imperialismo demuestra que su mayor eficacia no reside solo en la violencia que ejerce, sino en su capacidad para desarmar políticamente a sus adversarios, incluso desde posiciones que se reclaman críticas o de izquierdas.

Efectivamente, frente a una agresión imperialista que hace apenas unas décadas habría provocado movilizaciones masivas, hoy asistimos con demasiada frecuencia a una sustitución del análisis por teorías conspirativas recicladas, a menudo, como hemos visto, procedentes de los mismos aparatos mediáticos y de inteligencia que han impulsado históricamente las campañas de desestabilización contra Venezuela y otros países del Sur global. 

Frente a ello, recuperar el análisis materialista, atender a las estructuras, identificar los intereses en juego y sostener una crítica anclada en hechos verificables no es una opción más entre otras, sino una obligación estratégica. En un mundo atravesado por una crisis sistémica de extraordinarias dimensiones y por la consecuente intensificación de las agresiones imperialistas, el rigor y la disciplina intelectuales no son ningún lujo, sino una forma de resistencia activa y una condición imprescindible para reconstruir la solidaridad internacional y la acción colectiva que agresiones como las que estamos experimentando exigen.

Por ello, conviene centrarse en los hechos que conocemos. Es decir, las sanciones, el saqueo de activos, las amenazas militares, las operaciones encubiertas, la violencia económica sistemática y, por supuesto, el secuestro del presidente constitucional y su esposa en contra del derecho internacional —en tiempos en que cada vez queda más en evidencia que tal derecho apenas ha parecido serlo mientras le ha servido al hegemón para sostener el control global—. 

Es por medio de estos hechos corroborables que evitamos el fango de la opinión infundada y nos podemos centrar en lo que en este momento resulta esencial: denunciar la flagrante violación estadounidense de la soberanía de Venezuela, exponer la amenaza que esto representa para el resto del mundo y, consecuentemente, exigir la inmediata liberación de los ciudadanos venezolanos Nicolás Maduro y Cilia Flores.

samedi 10 janvier 2026

Madrid: ¿el Miami de la oligarquía venezolana?

Fuente https://esrt.space/opinion/carmen-parejo/522785-madrid-miami-oligarquia-venezolana?
Publicado:
Madrid: ¿el Miami de la oligarquía venezolana?

Edmundo González llegó a España el pasado 8 de septiembre tras un acuerdo en el que participaron tanto el Gobierno español como el venezolano. La llegada de González se produjo en medio de un uso partidista interno de la cuestión de Venezuela en el Reino de España.

En pocos días, hemos visto como se llevaba a cabo una votación inaudita en el Congreso de los Diputados de España para reconocer a González como presidente de Venezuela, pese a que ni siquiera el abogado del político venezolano había solicitado tal reconocimiento y teniendo en cuenta, además, el absurdo de que el Parlamento de un país pretenda determinar quién es el presidente de otra nación. A su vez, tanto el presidente del Gobierno, Pedro Sánchez, como destacados líderes de la oposición, como el expresidente, Mariano Rajoy, se reunieron con el excandidato opositor de Venezuela en estos días.

El caso de González no es una novedad, el político se une a otros venezolanos opositores que se han instalado en los últimos años en Madrid. Los casos más conocidos son el de Leopoldo López, responsable de la 'Operación La Salida', condenado en Venezuela por su responsabilidad en la muerte de 43 personas; su mediática esposa Lilian Tintori; Julio Borges o Antonio Ledezma, entre otros.

Durante años en los medios españoles se han publicado diversos artículos en los que destacaban un "desembarco" de fortunas latinas en la capital del reino, donde es recurrente señalar que el fenómeno tiene un claro impulsor: el clan venezolano de los Capriles, familia del excandidato opositor Henrique Capriles, y su ascendente influencia en el mercado inmobiliario del lujo.

La familia Capriles se afianzó en Venezuela, a través del control sobre medios impresos, tales como Últimas noticias o El Mundo, que dominaron durante mucho tiempo el mercado mediático venezolano. A su vez, se hicieron con un jugoso negocio inmobiliario centrado en oficinas y apartamentos de lujo en la ciudad de Caracas. Su llegada a España se produjo en 2013, aprovechando que muchos venezolanos acaudalados se marcharon del país una década antes tras la victoria de Hugo Chávez y el triunfo de la Revolución Bolivariana.

La familia Capriles se hizo con un jugoso negocio inmobiliario centrado en oficinas y apartamentos de lujo en la ciudad de Caracas.

El despertar del pueblo venezolano también conllevó un despertar para la oligarquía del país, que se trasladó a España con el fin de hacer negocios en terrenos que consideraron más amables.

Exiliados ricos

A mediados de 2022, The New York Times publicó un artículo firmado por su corresponsal en España, Raphael Minder, donde aseguraba que Madrid definitivamente había desbancado a Miami como destino preferido por los latinoamericanos ricos. Este texto señalaba que esta movilización de las oligarquías latinoamericanas se debía a los cambios políticos producidos en la región, inventando un novedoso concepto: "exiliados ricos".

Ante eso, debemos preguntarnos: ¿por qué la riqueza es considerada un motivo para el exilio? El medio estadounidense también atendía a esta cuestión y presentaba dos ejemplos: los colombianos ricos que previsiblemente se marcharían del país si se producía una victoria de Gustavo Petro, debido a que este había planteado subir los impuestos; y también advertían que el mensaje de Gabriel Boric en Chile que hablaba sobre favorecer una sociedad más igualitaria, también habría hecho sonar las alarmas.

Los ricos son muy sensibles a que se limite su acción expoliadora, pero España tiene la solución: con una inversión inmobiliaria de 500.000 euros, obtienes una visa dorada y todas las facilidades para engordar tu cartera en territorio español.

No deja de ser contradictorio, aunque no sorprendente, observar cómo los habituales voceros políticos de una oportunista campaña contra la inmigración y los cambios demográficos que de ella se derivan, no vean mayor problema en privilegiar con leyes la llegada masiva y el control efectivo sobre barrios enteros que estos multimillonarios están provocando, con consecuencias sociales concretas como el encarecimiento de la vivienda y la expulsión de gran parte de la población de las ciudades.

Venezuela llama a consultas a su embajadora en España

No podemos dejar de advertir que el interés de estos voceros en enfrentar emociones a través de los fenómenos migratorios, finalmente, solo es una performance que busca enfrentar a pobres contra pobres. Su racismo también es una cuestión de clase. Entre ellos se reconocen y se protegen. Ojalá, desde el otro lado, también tuviésemos claro a quién debemos proteger y, en este caso, a quién no.

Otro sector que se ha visto afectado en relación a la llegada del "exilio rico" venezolano, ha sido la banca, donde destaca la figura de Juan Carlos Escotet, banquero hispano-venezolano.

Escotet se inicia bajo la protección del banquero nacido en Cuba Orlando Castro, y gracias a la renta petrolera venezolana y las ventajas que ofrecía pertenecer al grupo de banqueros cercanos al gobierno de Carlos Andrés Pérez, su ascenso fue rápido, con la fundación del banco BANESCO y convirtiéndose ya durante la década de los 90 en uno de los hombres más ricos de Venezuela.

Tras la crisis de las cajas de ahorro en España, el gobierno gallego, dirigido por Alberto Núñez Feijóo, en la actualidad máximo dirigente del Partido Popular a nivel estatal, decidió la fusión de CaixaNova y Caixa Galicia, dando paso a NovaCaixaGalicia. Esta operación, que costó 9.000 millones en ayudas públicas, acabó en 2013 con una intervención estatal y la venta a Juan Carlos Escotet, por solo 1.000 millones de euros, dando paso a la creación de ABANCA.

¿Grupo de presión interno?

Sin embargo, sería inocente creer que el poder que han ido adquiriendo estos grupos, dentro de sectores tan sensibles como es el mercado inmobiliario o la banca, no esté suponiendo a su vez la consolidación de un grupo de presión interno que afecta a la política doméstica en España.

Leopoldo López Gil, el padre de Leopoldo López, en 2019 se convirtió en eurodiputado de la mano del Partido Popular. A su vez, en 2016, la familia Capriles entró a formar parte de la administración de la sociedad detrás del medio de comunicación The Objective, que ha ganado cierta relevancia en los últimos meses por su campaña, muchas veces a través de la creación de bulos contra el gobierno de Pedro Sánchez, según denunció en una investigación en Diario Red el periodista Román Cuesta, en abril de este mismo año.

Los intereses detrás de haber aupado y dado la bienvenida a esta diáspora multimillonaria y bastante corrupta venezolana en España son evidentes: tratar de derrocar el proceso revolucionario en Venezuela. El Estado español aúna razones económicas, en relación con los intereses de las multinacionales españolas en Venezuela; y geopolíticas, por el temor de perder su capacidad de injerencia en la zona por el surgimiento de gobiernos populares soberanos.

Cuba y Miami

En 1959 llegaron a la ciudad de Miami políticos corruptos y policías torturadores que huían de los revolucionarios cubanos tras el derrocamiento del dictador Fulgencio Batista. A la CIA y a EE.UU. también le interesó promocionar a estos grupos para crear desestabilización en Cuba y favorecer una intervención estadounidense. Ese es el origen de la mafia cubana de Miami que ha estado detrás de múltiples atentados terroristas y de actos de injerencia política tanto en Cuba, como en otros países latinoamericanos, pero, también dentro del propio EE.UU. 

La historia se repite dos veces: la primera como tragedia, la segunda como farsa.