Washington’s aggressive maritime pursuit, denounced as “international piracy” by Caracas, escalates tensions and draws global rebuke, raising alarms over resource control and sovereignty.
A high-stakes maritime drama is unfolding in the Caribbean Sea, threatening to spiral into a broader international conflict. The United States, in a significant escalation of its pressure campaign against Venezuela, is actively pursuing and seizing Venezuelan oil tankers in international waters. The actions, which Caracas condemns as outright “international piracy,” have sparked an emergency meeting at the United Nations Security Council and drawn sharp criticism from global powers, framing a classic struggle over natural resources and national sovereignty.
The “Dark Fleet” Chase and Washington’s Justification
The spotlight is on the U.S. Coast Guard, whose role has rapidly expanded from domestic security to what appears to be an international enforcement arm. In recent weeks, U.S. forces have confirmed the seizure of at least two tankers—the Skipper on December 10 and the Centuries on December 20—and are in active pursuit of a third, the Bella 1.
U.S. officials, speaking anonymously to outlets like CNN, label these vessels part of a “dark fleet” used by Venezuela to evade sweeping American sanctions. They claim the ships sail under false flags and are subject to U.S. court seizure orders. White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly stated the Centuries was a “sanctioned vessel,” though analysts note it does not appear on official U.S. sanctions lists. This discrepancy has fueled fears that Washington’s net may be widening to target any Venezuelan oil shipment, not just the 30 vessels previously sanctioned.
The official U.S. justification has centered on national security and the fight against drug trafficking. Before the UN, U.S. representative Mike Waltz framed the operations as part of a “non-international armed conflict” aimed at strangling the finances of the “Cartel of the Suns,” an organization Washington designates as a terrorist group and alleges is linked to the government of President Nicolás Maduro.
Venezuela’s Fierce Rejection and Legal Counteroffensive
Venezuela’s response has been one of furious defiance. Vice President Delcy Rodríguez denounced the seizures as “theft and hijacking,” vowing to take “all appropriate actions” through the UN and other global bodies. At the emergency Security Council session, Venezuelan diplomat Samuel Moncada delivered a blistering critique, accusing the U.S. of imposing a “colonial system” and executing “the greatest extortion known in our history.”
He cut to the heart of the matter, stating, “It’s not drugs, it’s not security, it’s not freedom; it is oil, it’s the mines, it’s the land.”
Domestically, Venezuela’s National Assembly is considering a new law that would impose prison sentences of up to 20 years for anyone supporting or participating in acts of “piracy” or blockades against the nation—a clear message to external and internal actors.
Global Condemnation and the “Resource War” Specter
The U.S. actions have not occurred in a diplomatic vacuum. The UN Security Council meeting revealed significant international unease.
-
Russia’s Ambassador, Vasily Nebenzya, called the seizures a violation of “all fundamental norms of international law.”
-
China’s representative, Sun Lei, opposed “acts of unilateralism and intimidation” and affirmed Venezuela’s right to develop cooperative ties.
-
Algeria expressed “great concern” over the developments.
-
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian phoned President Maduro to offer support against U.S. “aggressions,” highlighting the formation of a geopolitical bloc resistant to American unilateralism.
The crisis took a more provocative turn when former President Donald Trump, who has signaled a hardline approach should he return to office, claimed the seized Venezuelan oil was “ours.” He referred to Venezuela’s historic nationalization of its oil industry in the 1970s as “theft.” For Venezuelan authorities, this rhetoric confirmed their long-held suspicion: the ultimate goal is economic strangulation and resource control, not security.
A New Caribbean Blockade in the Making?
Observers are drawing parallels to the U.S. embargo against Cuba, a 60-year economic blockade that has shaped the island’s destiny. There is a growing fear that Washington is testing a similar, potentially devastating strategy on Venezuela—a nation whose economy is profoundly dependent on oil exports. With the world’s largest proven oil reserves at stake, the stakes are monumental.
The threat of a full-scale naval blockade looms in political discourse. A total embargo could cripple Venezuela’s already struggling economy, causing severe humanitarian consequences. The Venezuelan government and its allies argue this is a prelude to a promised “regime change” that would install a U.S.-friendly administration, allowing foreign companies, as opposition figure María Corina Machado has suggested, to regain control over the nation’s vast resources.
For International Readers: Why This Matters
This is more than a regional dispute. It is a litmus test for international law, the limits of unilateral sanctions, and the right of nations to freely trade their resources. The spectacle of a powerful nation’s coast guard chasing and commandeering another country’s commercial ships on the high seas sets a dangerous precedent. For countries like Nepal, which steadfastly champions sovereignty and peaceful resolution of disputes, the escalation in the Caribbean is a worrying example of how great power politics can overshadow the principles of the UN Charter.
The world is watching to see if the Caribbean becomes the theater for a new, openly contested resource war, or if diplomacy can de-escalate a crisis that is, at its core, about who owns and controls the wealth beneath a nation’s soil—and who gets to sail away with it.