Venezuela

[blindpig]

Rubio and Miller compete to see who is more aggressive against Venezuela.
Sep 30, 2025 , 2:33 pm .


Marco Rubio and Stephen Miller have an aggressive view toward Venezuela, but it's the only thing they share (Photo: Evelyn Hockstein/Reuters)

The United States security architecture rests on two pillars of distinct origin and scope : the Homeland Security Council (HSC ) and the National Security Advisor (NSA ) . The former responds to the logic of "internal strength," while the latter embodies the heart of " global grand strategy . "

Both are part of the Executive Office of the President, but their political clout and ability to influence foreign policymaking are not equal.

The HSC , created on October 29, 2001, by executive order of George W. Bush in the context of 9/11, was designed to coordinate policies that protect the United States from " insider threats " : terrorism, irregular migration, cyberattacks, critical infrastructure and natural disasters.

Currently , under the direction of Stephen Miller , the HSC is pushing for immigration control, technological surveillance, and border hardening measures that, while projected outward by the nature of the " threats , " remain essentially domestic policy decisions.

Its role is not to negotiate treaties or design military alliances, but to detect risks and recommend actions to protect domestic space.

In contrast, the NSA , officially the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, occupies a privileged place in US strategic decision-making.

Created in 1953 to directly advise the president without Senate confirmation, the position has been held, on an interim basis, by Secretary of State Marco Rubio since May .

From the White House, the NSA defines defense priorities, military alliances , economic sanctions , and even covert operations. Its direct access to the president allows it to shape foreign policy in real time, without the checks and balances that other institutions face.

Although the HSC does not design foreign policy in the traditional sense, the interconnectedness of what they consider internal and external threats compels them to work closely with the National Security Council (NSC) and the NSA itself.

What The Guardian says
The episode known as Signalgate opened an unexpected rift in the Trump administration 's structure . In May, a so-called "accident" exposed the fragility of internal communications when then-National Security Adviser Mike Waltz mistakenly added a journalist to a messaging group (made up of several senior executive branch officials) on the Signal platform.

The scandal forced his dismissal and left a key White House position vacant, sparking fierce competition for the position.

Among the names that immediately circulated were Stephen Miller, Richard Grenell, and Sebastian Gorka. Bloomberg even placed Miller , the architect of the most extreme immigration policies of the Trump era , as a leading candidate.

However, Trump himself dismissed this , without disqualifying, in an interview with NBC News : "Stephen is much higher in the hierarchy; that position would be a demotion for him."

The comment confirmed that Miller doesn't need a formal position to wield decisive influence within the presidential ring of power.

A report by The Guardian has added new elements to the Washington chessboard. According to sources within the administration, Stephen Miller, in his role as Homeland Security Advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff, has allegedly been the true architect of the attacks on ships in the Caribbean, where at least 14 civilians have been killed, actions that Washington justifies with the pantomime of anti-drug operations.

The article details that, under his leadership, the HSC acquired an unprecedented degree of autonomy, operating de facto as a command center parallel to the NSC.

It was Miller who gave the HSC the ability to act as its own entity during Trump's second term, coordinating military missions such as the Hellfire missile attack on a "Venezuelan vessel" on September 15 , the article states, without the full knowledge of all senior White House officials until just hours before its execution.

The report also exposes the legal loopholes in these operations. The White House has attempted to justify the attacks by relying on the powers of Article II of the Constitution, claiming "self-defense" in response to the designation of the Venezuelan group Tren de Aragua as a "foreign terrorist organization." This is the typical victim-playing stance used to excuse its actions that violate fundamental rights under international law under the guise of a perpetual "emergency." Exceptionalism in action.

However , a federal appeals court has already ruled that the deportations of Venezuelans based on this designation were illegal, as it failed to demonstrate that the Aragua Train acted as an arm of the Miraflores government. Despite this, the attacks continued under a vague legal cover approved by the Pentagon, the Department of Justice, and White House legal advisors.

While the report appears to displace Rubio from the center of this new push against Venezuela, the reality is more complex, since both Miller and the current Secretary of State share the same ideological discourse of aggression and maintain, without evidence, the " drug trafficking " narrative .

Even so, it's not that they're now working as a cohesive team; rather, they 're engaged in a hidden competition, each with their own interests and distinct positions from each sphere of influence, whose agendas may overlap. This makes the outlook for Venezuela even more dangerous if the goal is to please the tycoon president.

Miller as a free electron
Rubio , dubbed "Little Marco" by Trump during the 2016 Republican primaries, represents the Republican Party's foreign policy orthodoxy, co-opted by neoconservatives and perpetual war hawks. He does not belong to the MAGA core of the Trump coalition cabinet, and therefore has had to maneuver to secure spaces of influence that allow him to influence key decisions without provoking rejection from the most extremist circles and, consequently, elevate his own agenda.

Miller, on the other hand, is a pure product of the MAGA agenda, trained in the hardline anti-immigration camp and with direct access to Trump since his first administration . In fact, during the Republican primaries, Miller not only worked to undermine Jeb Bush, but also made Rubio his favorite target, ferociously attacking him for his role in the so-called "Gang of Eight , " the bipartisan immigration reform bill of 2013.

"Marco Rubio is, let's say, his biggest enemy," a Republican operative said at the time .

Emails revealed by NBC News show how Miller coordinated with Breitbart News to publish articles portraying Rubio as a pro-immigration "extremist," even accusing him of "legalizing foreign sex offenders."

From rallies in Florida to leaks to the conservative press, Miller waged a systematic campaign to destroy Rubio's credibility with the Trump base.

Even within the White House, Miller is not without resistance. In 2018, seventeen Jewish organizations, including American Jewish World Service and J Street, publicly demanded his dismissal, denouncing his "extreme views" and his advocacy of racist policies.

These criticisms, far from weakening him, reinforced the style of power that Trump has granted him : a first-string influence without the need for visible positions, which makes him less vulnerable to public pressure and allows him to operate in the shadows.

Rubio, for his part, has had to adapt to this reality. Although he maintains a classic interventionist rhetoric and seeks to project himself as an indispensable figure on Latin American issues, his position outside the MAGA core forces him to forge tactical alliances to avoid losing ground to Miller.

In the Venezuelan case, both actors share the same coercive line, but differ in their position within Trump's entourage.

Miller, without needing to establish himself as a political figure within the Cabinet , exercises his structural influence from his position , while Rubio depends on being visible and staying relevant in that close circle to conserve oxygen .

That is, Miller doesn't need to attract Trump's attention; Rubio, on the other hand, must survive politically within that environment.

Rubio is the central proponent of the regime change agenda against Venezuela, recalling that he was the main driving force behind the illegal sanctions regime.

It's no coincidence that the new escalation of aggression began to take shape when Rubio took over as interim NSA president; Miller, for his part, seems to be taking advantage of the aftermath of that dynamic, aligning his extremist codes with the political opportunity his position represents.

It is even plausible that Rubio is maneuvering to convince Miller to channel his radical style to the goals he promotes, taking advantage of the influence and extreme temperament of Trump 's protégé .

These initiatives demonstrate not only his authoritarian view of migration as a threat, but also a pattern of extreme behavior that Rubio has channeled to further his own agenda and maximize the impact of pressure on Venezuela.

In the absence of a coherent policy, this internal conflict or lack of harmony turns decision-making into an erratic, unpredictable and potentially more aggressive process .

https://misionverdad.com/globalistan/ru ... -venezuela

Google Translator

******

Trump Was Wrong to Laugh at Venezuelan Militia Members
October 1, 2025


September 13, 2025, San Cristóbal, Venezuela: A group of civilians and military personnel aim assault rifles during training at a military camp. The training for militia members, reservists, and volunteers took place at various barracks and military training centers in Venezuela, organized by the government of Nicolás Maduro as part of what authorities describe as an effort to strengthen national defense through civil-military mobilization. Photo: Jorge Castellanos/Zuma Press/ContactoPhoto.

By Bruno Sgarzini – Sep 28, 2025

Underestimating Chavista strength is one of the recurring mistakes of American presidents.

Donald Trump is wrong to laugh at Venezuelan women militia members for their height and weight. They were the same ones who, in 2020, along with fishermen from Chuao, recognized a small boat carrying several former Venezuelan soldiers and two former Green Berets from the US Army Special Forces. The group planned to enter Venezuela by sea, seize a nearby airport, and fly Nicolás Maduro out of the country after a “fantastic” capture, the kind seen in Mission: Impossible, that could only succeed in their imaginations.

Aaron Barry and Luke Denman, the mercenaries in question, were two American operatives who had fought in Libya and Iraq and were recruited for the mission. They held Bronze Star Medals and other insignia awarded by the US Army when they were arrested, thanks to the very militia members Trump now mocks on social media. These are the same women the US president ridicules for their appearance and phenotype, yet he does not hesitate to accuse them of belonging to the mythical “Cartel of the Suns.”


A screenshot of Trump’s social media post mocking Venezuelan militia members. Photo: Truth Social.

Recent Venezuelan history shows a long line of underestimations and miscalculations by opponents, senior foreign officials, and US presidents. Pedro Carmona Estanga, then-president of the business group Fedecámaras, believed that in April 2002 it would be enough to arrest Hugo Chávez to force his resignation, and that Chavista military forces would not counterattack to retake Miraflores Palace, backed by massive mobilizations in Caracas neighborhoods.

Donald Trump believed his national security adviser, John Bolton, in January 2019, when Bolton claimed that if the US recognized Juan Guaidó’s self-proclamation as president, thousands of military personnel would defect and stage a coup against Maduro.

Later, in one of the most ironic episodes in Venezuelan history, Trump again relied on assurances from Leopoldo López and Juan Guaidó, relayed through Bolton, that Maikel Moreno, then-head of the Supreme Court, would issue a ruling recognizing Guaidó as president, with the backing of Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino López and SEBIN chief Christopher Figuera. The saga ended with Guaidó and López recording a video on a dark highway, calling on the military to rise up, while Moreno and Padrino López ignored their calls. For the immortality of Venezuelan memes, rebel troops fired ammunition stored in banana crates from the Francisco Fajardo Highway. The image of that fiasco, which sparked global mockery of US power, contributed to Bolton’s ouster from the Trump administration.



A few years later, the same fanciful, outdated thinking appears to have returned with the White House comeback of the orange-haired creator of The Apprentice. It’s no longer Bolton filling Trump’s ears with empty promises, but Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who also serves as national security adviser, envisioning a revival of gunboat diplomacy, when the United States militarily occupied Latin American nations and orchestrated coups. In Rubio’s “domino” logic, Venezuela’s fall would end Cuba’s revolution and oust Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega. It would also send a warning to any country that defies Washington or draws close to China or Russia, Monroeism on steroids.

As in past cases, this calculation, made by Cuban American officials who have never lived in Latin America, assumes the “Chávez regime” would collapse overnight and that María Corina Machado would emerge as the undisputed leader of all Venezuelans, leaving everyone else to fend for themselves. But many things could go wrong. If US military pressure, “surgical strikes,” or “targeted assassinations” succeeded, Venezuela could descend into a power vacuum, potentially seized by military factions more radical than Maduro, or fragment into warlord-controlled zones, as in Libya or Syria, with a US-backed rump state in the center. Venezuela has a long history of regional caudillos that could resurface.

Alternatively, as in previous episodes, nothing might happen: military pressure could fail, Trump could lose interest, and he might strike a deal with Venezuela, exchanging Venezuelan migrants for oil, as proposed by MAGA-aligned members of his cabinet. Yet one of the worst outcomes for Trumpism would be a military intervention in Venezuela that achieves nothing. Such a failure would shatter the myth that gunboat diplomacy can be revived in Latin America. It could happen, for instance, that Trump deploys heavily decorated US soldiers, only for them to be detained by the very militia members he mocks online.

That is why Trump is wrong to laugh at Venezuelan militia members.

https://orinocotribune.com/trump-was-wr ... a-members/

[blindpig]

Venezuela Condemns US Empire’s F-35 Flyover, Warns as a ‘Miscalculated Provocation’
October 3, 2025


Sukhoi Su-30MK2 fighter jets of the Venezuelan Air Force in flight. Photo: FANB/File photo.

Caracas (OrinocoTribune.com)—Venezuelan Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino has reported this Thursday, October 2, that at least five US F-35 fighter jets have flown over the Caribbean Sea near the Venezuelan border, an action described as a provocation and a threat to national security.

Hours later, the Venezuelan Ministries of Defense and Foreign Affairs released a joint communiqué formally condemning the incursion, which it said occurred approximately 75 kilometers (about 47 miles) off the Venezuelan coast within the Maiquetía Flight Information Region (FIR).

“We have detected within the Venezuelan Comprehensive Defense System […] more than five vectors with flight characteristics of 400 knots and flying at an altitude of 35,000 feet,” Padrino said during a briefing. “What does that indicate? They are combat aircraft that US imperialism has dared to bring close to Venezuelan shores.”

He identified the aircraft as F-35s based in Puerto Rico and operating as part of Washington’s regional “war on drugs” deployment. “We’re watching them, I want you to know,” he asserted. “And I want you to know that this doesn’t intimidate us, it doesn’t intimidate the people of Venezuela.” He described the incident as “an act of rudeness,” “a provocation,” and “a threat to the security of the nation.”

‘Calculation errors’
Minister Padrino urged the White House to “carefully consider its actions,” warning that its “miscalculations” could lead to a global conflict. He cited historical examples where powerful armies, such as those of Spain, the US empire, and Nazi Germany, were defeated by determined forces.

“Do not make a miscalculation when you decide to militarily attack the people of Venezuela,” he warned. “Don’t make that mistake. Think carefully, investigate thoroughly, and understand the national spirit.” He added that the US colonial government has repeatedly failed in its attempts at regime change by failing to account for the loyalty of the Bolivarian National Armed Force and popular resistance.

Official communiqué
The official statement from the Venezuelan government said the maneuver, identified by the Integrated Aerospace Defense Command (CODAI), “constitutes a provocation that threatens national sovereignty and violates the norms of international law.”

It stated the action “seriously jeopardized the operational safety of civil and commercial aviation in the Caribbean Sea,” a point corroborated by a sighting from the Colombian airline Avianca. The communique framed the incident as part of “a pattern of harassment that cannot be tolerated.”

Venezuela said it would submit the complaint to the United Nations Secretary-General, the Security Council, the International Civil Aviation Organization, and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States.

“The Bolivarian Government will not accept intimidation or aggression from any foreign power and will fully exercise its right to defend national sovereignty,” the statement concluded. “The Bolivarian National Armed Force will remain on permanent alert.”

Below, you can read the full unofficial translation of the Venezuelan statement:

The Ministries of People’s Power for Defense and Foreign Affairs of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela strongly denounce and reject the illegal incursion of United States combat aircraft detected on October 2, 2025, approximately 75 kilometers off our coast, within the Maiquetía Flight Information Region (FIR).

This maneuver, identified by the Integrated Aerospace Defense Command (CODAI), constitutes a provocation that threatens national sovereignty and violates the norms of international law and the Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation.

This action seriously jeopardized the operational safety of civil and commercial aviation in the Caribbean Sea; the incident was also sighted by the Colombian airline Avianca, adding to the official CODAI detection. This serious report adds to other similar illegal incursions previously reported and already denounced by the Venezuelan government, which constitutes a pattern of harassment that cannot be tolerated.

In this regard, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela demands that the United States Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, immediately cease his reckless, adventurous, and warmongering stance, which seeks to undermine the Zone of Peace in Latin America and the Caribbean and endangers regional stability.

The Venezuelan government will submit this complaint to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, the Security Council, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) so that the necessary measures can be taken to prevent the recurrence of these illegal and dangerous actions.

Venezuela reiterates that it will not accept intimidation or aggression from any foreign power and will fully exercise its right to defend national sovereignty, in accordance with international law. The Bolivarian National Armed Force will remain on permanent alert with its Integrated Aerospace Defense System.

Caracas, October 2, 2025

https://orinocotribune.com/venezuela-co ... ovocation/

*****

Deployment in the Caribbean: Armed designation of the Monroe Doctrine 2.0

Franco Vielma

2 Oct 2025 , 3:32 pm .


The USS Iwo Jima, an amphibious assault ship, is one of the U.S. vessels deployed in the Caribbean (Photo: US Navy)

The "war on drugs," driven by the United States, has transcended its anti-drug rhetoric to become a strategic tool for intervention in Latin America.

Under the guise of "combating drug trafficking," this policy has allowed Washington to consolidate its political, economic, and military position in the region, reproducing the deployment of American hegemony.

This year, the Donald Trump administration has brought with it a new, aggressive restructuring agenda that must be analyzed from a historical perspective and within the specifics of the current geopolitical moment.

"ANTI-DRUG FIGHT" AND STRATEGIC-MILITARY POSITIONING
The United States' aggressive relationship with the rest of the continent stems from historical interventions justified on doctrinal grounds, such as the Monroe Doctrine.

Since the " Banana Wars ," or military interventions in Central America and the Caribbean from the late 19th century, the United States has built a physical-concrete relationship with the region based on the use of force, interference, coercion and incentives, in order to deploy and consolidate its interests, moving "naturally" within its "area of ​​influence."

But it was Richard Nixon who formally launched the " war on drugs " in the Americas by declaring drug abuse in his country "public enemy number one" in 1971, launching a policy that combined domestic repression with intervention in Latin America and the Caribbean.

It's clear that for 50 years, the United States has shaped an expansionist regional anti-drug policy, outsourcing the causal factors of the narcotics problem and assigning responsibility to third countries, instead of addressing the issue of the consumer population on American soil, a situation that has turned that country into the main destination market and central critical hub for drug demand and importation. Americans never want to mention the other side of the coin.

Although U.S. anti-drug policies had precedents, such as the prohibition of opium and marijuana in the 20th century, Richard Nixon institutionalized the modern strategy by creating the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) in 1973 and promoting international treaties to criminalize drug trafficking. In Latin America, this translated into pressure on drug-producing countries like Colombia and Mexico to align their policies, laying the groundwork for the militarization and interference that would follow in later years.

During the Ronald Reagan era, the political, legal, and military architecture that governs the United States' anti-drug strategy in Latin America and the Caribbean took shape.

Under Reagan, the strategy initiated by Nixon was significantly intensified, transforming it into a pillar of US foreign policy with a militarized, ideological, and counterinsurgency focus.

Reagan amplified the narrative of drug trafficking as a threat to national security, linking it to "narcoterrorism" to justify interventions in the region, in the context of the Cold War and the fight against leftist movements.

The president increased the anti-drug budget, allocating massive resources to military and intelligence operations in Latin America. In 1986, National Security Directive 221 declared drug trafficking, for the first time, a "direct threat" to the United States, authorizing the use of military forces in operations.

This marked a shift toward active participation by the Pentagon and the CIA in joint operations programs in countries such as Colombia, Mexico, Bolivia, and Peru, where military advisors and DEA agents were deployed to train local forces and conduct operations.

Reagan promoted the expansion of Southern Command and strengthened the military presence in the region, increasing the number of bases and personnel in countries like Panama and Honduras under the pretext of combating drug trafficking.

Similarly, it was during Reagan's presidency that the "anti-drug" armed struggle was promoted, combined with a fight against the left in the context of the Cold War.

It's worth remembering: the US president channeled anti-drug funds to support the Contras in Nicaragua, a counterrevolutionary group opposed to the Sandinista government. The Iran-Contra scandal revealed that some of this funding came from illicit activities, including drug trafficking networks tolerated by the CIA.

Years later, in Colombia, anti-drug assistance from the United States was used to strengthen the Colombian army against the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). But at the same time, the DEA and Southern Command tolerated the collaboration of paramilitaries and drug traffickers like the Medellín Cartel, who participated jointly with the Colombian army in operations against the revolutionary army.

U.S. aid to Colombia (especially military supplies), along with drug money, contributions from Colombian businessmen, and funds from the Colombian Army and National Police, would later fuel the formation of the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), the largest right-wing paramilitary group.

The United States has managed to articulate its ideological struggles with interference and regular or irregular armed interventions under other pretexts, including the fight against drug trafficking.

In 2008, in addition to the deployment of the Fourth Fleet and strategies such as "Plan Colombia ," the military designation of the supposed anti-drug fight in Colombia was amplified.

This increased the US military presence in Colombia and the region, shaping a structure of interests divided into political interference, economics, and armed deployment.

In Mexico and Central America, the Merida Initiative (since 2008) has channeled billions into counter-drug equipment and a strengthened military presence, especially in Honduras and El Salvador.

Currently, the United States' military deployment and regional projection have taken shape from its infrastructure and operations centers in Puerto Rico, Cuba (Guantanamo), Honduras, El Salvador, Aruba-Curaçao, Panama, and Colombia as its main logistical points, and the use of its own bases or national bases in those countries for the various activities of the Southern Command and the Fourth Fleet.

THE NEW DEPLOYMENT IN THE CARIBBEAN
Unlike other regions of the world, Latin America and the Caribbean is essentially a politically stable and predominantly secure region, especially in the absence of major armed conflicts between countries.

The conflicts or situations of prolonged insecurity involving the use of weapons in Colombia and Haiti, while serious for those nations, have not spread catastrophically throughout the region, nor have they profoundly compromised regional strategic security.

The presence of foreign powers on the continent, such as China and Russia, has been strictly peaceful and is based on political and commercial relations with the nations of the region. Although some governments have established arms supply agreements from these countries, neither China nor Russia has military bases on this side of the world, nor have they had a prolonged military presence.

Despite these objective conditions, and even in the absence of vital and existential threats to the United States, the North American nation has achieved evident military hegemony and control in its so-called "backyard." Its armed presence in the region has been unjustified and disproportionate.

Once again, the United States is repositioning itself in the Caribbean in the name of the "war on drugs." The scope of operations and the use of extensive military equipment is nothing new. But Venezuela's Caribbean front now includes guided-missile destroyers, amphibious assault ships, a cruiser, a littoral combat ship, and a nuclear-powered attack submarine.

Other airborne threats include F-35 fighter jets, Reaper attack and reconnaissance drones, and radio-electronic surveillance aircraft.

It's clear that the proportionality and nature of these military elements differ from those of an anti-drug operation. It's actually a multipurpose operation that, as a front, pursues elements of international drug trafficking, but its central focus is regime change in Venezuela, reaffirming the United States' position in the continental space.

However, the United States' regional reach must be considered multifaceted. It targets Venezuela, but also Colombia, Mexico, and Honduras. It creates a de facto maritime exclusion zone, limiting economic activity. Trump and JD Vance have mocked this by pointing out that no one fishes in that area anymore, which has an impact on local economies in the Caribbean.

The expansion of the United States' physical presence on the continent imposes new political and legal kinetics.

One way to understand this is to note that the operation in the Caribbean is executing alleged drug traffickers without due process, and without posing a direct threat to military personnel and equipment. This clear violation of international law must be framed within the disruptive logic of the military operation in the Caribbean itself.

Washington is creating a security zone through excessive military force, a zone of exclusion from economic activities, without any intervention by governments, without respecting jurisdictional waters, effectively disabling exclusive economic zones and violating basic legal principles such as the right to life.

The United States is changing its physical and concrete interaction with the region. It is taking it to a new factual space, extending the legal boundaries of the United States, especially through the hyperuse of the term "narcoterrorism" and drug trafficking activity as a "cause of death" for Americans.

They apply that logic to the Caribbean, as if it were Lake Michigan, but without upholding certain standards that they would uphold in Lake Michigan. They intend to make the Caribbean a "no man's sea," a zone without rules.

Trump has designated the Tren de Aragua and the so-called, nonexistent Cartel of the Suns as "narco-terrorist organizations," but at the same time, his administration is pursuing before the Supreme Court the use of the "Alien Enemies Act," which indiscriminately classifies the Venezuelan immigrant population in the United States as "criminals."

The Caribbean becomes a very prolonged extension of the dispute over the legal overreach that Trump's policies are implementing within his country.

Recently, the president stated (in a digression understandable given his age) that 300 million Americans had died from drugs . He said this to justify the bombing of ships in the Caribbean. Assuming he really meant 300,000 overdose deaths per year in the United States, that figure is also incorrect. The National Center for Health Statistics in that country indicated that just over 80,000 people died from drug overdoses in 2024 .

Trump also noted that "every drug boat from Venezuela kills about 25,000 people , mostly with fentanyl. We've eliminated them. We've eliminated four (boats)."

It's delusional to claim, without any support, evidence, or exhaustive report , that Venezuela produces fentanyl. And even to claim that each drug-laden boat entering the United States kills 25,000 citizens, even though it's clear that thousands of boats, planes, and trucks carrying thousands of tons of drugs enter the country every year.

The president deliberately lies, stretching narratives to shape his intention to expand legal boundaries. All through the same aims and styles that underpin the physical and military presence they have already built de facto in the Caribbean.

BACKGROUND ISSUES
From Washington, specifically the State Department, there is talk of relaunching a policy focused on consolidating the traditional North American "sphere of influence." De-escalating the geopolitical confrontation with China and Russia in certain latitudes and returning to America's "natural space." And this is seasoned with the Monroe Doctrine 2.0 and new civilizational discourses , such as that of J.D. Vance, who has said that the American reassertion aims to "tame this savage continent" via "regional dominance" as a central point of hemispheric security and "defense of Western civilization."

The supposed US tactical withdrawal from other geopolitical fronts and theaters of operations is being announced without the closure of any bases in West Asia or Europe. That structure remains intact. It's also not true that Washington has returned to the region, as they never left.

But the aggressive approach palpable in the Caribbean is a defining characteristic of a new agenda governed by the supposed fight against drug trafficking as a vector.

Thus, the ingredients for a new cycle of tension, aggression, and regional instability are coming together. These are absolutely dangerous times.

https://misionverdad.com/globalistan/de ... -monroe-20

Google Translator

[blindpig]

When María Corina Machado wins the Nobel Peace Prize, “peace” has lost its meaning

Venezuelan opposition figure María Corina Machado was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, but there’s nothing peaceful about her politics.

October 10, 2025 by Michelle Ellner

In 2002, former US President George W. Bush meets María Corina Machado, then director of Súmate, an "independent democratic civil society group" funded by the US government to "oversee the electoral process in Venezuela". Source: White House/Eric Draper
When I saw the headline María Corina Machado wins the Peace Prize, I almost laughed at the absurdity. But I didn’t, because there’s nothing funny about rewarding someone whose politics have brought so much suffering. Anyone who knows what she stands for knows there’s nothing remotely peaceful about her politics.

If this is what counts as “peace” in 2025, then the prize itself has lost every ounce of credibility. I’m Venezuelan-American, and I know exactly what Machado represents. She’s the smiling face of Washington’s regime-change machine, the polished spokesperson for sanctions, privatization, and foreign intervention dressed up as democracy.

Machado’s politics are steeped in violence. She has called for foreign intervention, even appealing directly to Benjamin Netanyahu, the architect of Gaza’s annihilation, to help “liberate” Venezuela with bombs under the banner of “freedom,” She has demanded sanctions, that silent form of warfare whose effects – as studies in The Lancet and other journals have shown – have killed more people than war, cutting off medicine, food, and energy to entire populations.

Machado has spent her entire political life promoting division, eroding Venezuela’s sovereignty, and denying its people the right to live with dignity.

This is who María Corina Machado really is:

She helped lead the 2002 coup that briefly overthrew a democratically elected president, and signed the Carmona Decree that erased the Constitution and dissolved every public institution overnight.

She worked hand in hand with Washington to justify regime change, using her platform to demand foreign military intervention to “liberate” Venezuela through force.

She cheered on Donald Trump’s threats of invasion and his naval deployments in the Caribbean, a show of force that risks igniting regional war under the pretext of “combating narcotrafficking.” While Trump sent warships and froze assets, Machado stood ready to serve as his local proxy, promising to deliver Venezuela’s sovereignty on a silver platter.

She pushed for the US sanctions that strangled the economy, knowing exactly who would pay the price: the poor, the sick, the working class.

She helped construct the so-called “interim government,” a Washington-backed puppet show run by a self-appointed “president” who looted Venezuela’s resources abroad while children at home went hungry.

She vows to reopen Venezuela’s embassy in Jerusalem, aligning herself openly with the same apartheid state that bombs hospitals and calls it self-defense.

Now she wants to hand over the country’s oil, water, and infrastructure to private corporations. This is the same recipe that made Latin America the laboratory of neoliberal misery in the 1990s.

Machado was also one of the political architects of “La Salida,” the 2014 opposition campaign that called for escalated protests, including guarimba tactics. Those weren’t “peaceful protests” as the foreign press claimed; they were organized barricades meant to paralyze the country and force the government’s fall. Streets were blocked with burning trash and barbed wire, buses carrying workers were torched, and people suspected of being Chavista were beaten or killed. Even ambulances and doctors were attacked. Some Cuban medical brigades were nearly burned alive. Public buildings, food trucks, and schools were destroyed. Entire neighborhoods were held hostage by fear while opposition leaders like Machado cheered from the sidelines and called it “resistance.”

She praises Trump’s “decisive action” against what she calls a “criminal enterprise,” aligning herself with the same man who cages migrant children and tears families apart under ICE’s watch, while Venezuelan mothers search for their children disappeared by US migration policies.

Machado isn’t a symbol of peace or progress. She is part of a global alliance between fascism, Zionism, and neoliberalism, an axis that justifies domination in the language of democracy and peace. In Venezuela, that alliance has meant coups, sanctions, and privatization. In Gaza, it means genocide and the erasure of a people. The ideology is the same: a belief that some lives are disposable, that sovereignty is negotiable, and that violence can be sold as order.

If Henry Kissinger could win a Peace Prize, why not María Corina Machado? Maybe next year they’ll give one to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation for “compassion under occupation.”

Every time this award is handed to an architect of violence disguised as diplomacy, it spits in the face of those who actually fight for peace: the Palestinian medics digging bodies from rubble, the journalists risking their lives in Gaza to document the truth and the humanitarian workers of the Flotilla sailing to break the siege and deliver aid to starving children in Gaza, with nothing but courage and conviction.

But real peace is not negotiated in boardrooms or awarded on stages. Real peace is built by women organizing food networks during blockades, by Indigenous communities defending rivers from extraction, by workers who refuse to be starved into obedience, by Venezuelan mothers mobilizing to demand the return of children seized under US ICE and migration policies and by nations that choose sovereignty over servitude. That’s the peace Venezuela, Cuba, Palestine, and every nation of the Global South deserves.

https://peoplesdispatch.org/2025/10/10/ ... s-meaning/

*****

President Nicolás Maduro: “There is no global response to climate change”

“A powerful current has emerged, which are the supremacists of the north who want to impose denialism,” said President Maduro.


The president of Venezuela warned that climate change affects the daily life of the people. Photo: Presidential Press

October 9, 2025 Hour: 8:29 pm

The President of Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro, questioned the lack of a global response to climate change, one of the greatest challenges for humanity.

During the World Congress in Defense of Mother Earth, this Thursday, the president of Venezuela pointed out that, although 29 summits of the Conference of the Parties on climate change (COP) have been held, there is no global response.

“There are good diagnoses, experts, scientists,” but not a joint response.

“The social movements, the experts are not exaggerating when they say that we are experiencing a real climate emergency throughout our only planet: planet Earth,” stressed the Bolivarian head of state, who pointed out the historical responsibility of the great powers in the exploitation of resources and the denialist tendencies of climate change.

At the World Congress in Defense of Mother Earth, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro stated that despite the 29 COPs that have been held over the years, with the participation of outstanding scientists and experts, no global consensus has been reached to combat the climate… pic.twitter.com/jhw4XaNPQY

— teleSUR English (@telesurenglish) October 10, 2025
He specified that “imperial supremacists deny that there is a true climate emergency and those who suffer the most are the humble peoples of the planet.” In this sense, he spoke with the specialists and guests at the event, about the exponential growth of abrupt and destructive rainfall, monsoon rains, as an expression of the warming of the Caribbean Sea.

“A powerful current has emerged that are the supremacists of the north who want to impose denialism. Our struggle is to stop the supremacists and from the governments and peoples of a popular nature the measures of attention, mitigation and response to the phenomenon of the climate emergency,” insisted the president.

He warned that climate change affects people’s daily lives.

Nicolás Maduro welcomed the emergence of “a consensual global conscience” for attention to the climate emergency. However, he warned, that awareness has been manipulated.

“Where are the Paris Agreement, the Copenhagen proposals, the commitments made, the funds to improve living conditions, the concrete and verifiable actions to stop the process of contamination of the environment, land and seas? It is a question that must be asked,” he said.

The Venezuelan president referred to October 12, the Day of Indigenous Resistance and Native Peoples, for the linking of communities for environmental struggles, the rights to sustainable use of land and care for the environment.

He criticized those who celebrate colonialism and genocide by sticking to the discourse of the encounter between cultures, to refer to the violent colonization of Latin American and Caribbean peoples.

“We celebrate hope and resistance,” he said.

Similarly, the Bolivarian leader criticized the predatory model of capitalism, emphasizing the destruction of the capacity for self-regulation of life on the planet

https://www.telesurenglish.net/presiden ... te-change/

[blindpig]

Venezuela’s Interior Minister: María Corina Machado Behind Thwarted False-Flag Attack on US Embassy
October 10, 2025


María Corina Machado at a rally in Caracas, January 10, 2025. Photo: Jimmy Villalta /VWPics/Legion-Media.

The Venezuelan minister of the Interior, Justice, and Peace, Diosdado Cabello, reported that far-right politician María Corina Machado was behind the failed attack on the former US Embassy in Caracas.

Machado “failed in her attempt to escalate violence, as her plan to attack the US Embassy in Caracas was exposed,” Cabello said on his television program Con el Mazo Dando on Wednesday, October 8. He added that the leader of the far-right opposition faction was trying “to provoke a foreign military reaction,” although she “ended up confirming her usual incompetence.”

In this situation, the Venezuelan government “did what was necessary” and established “direct communication” with the US to warn it of the threat, he said.

Earlier, President Nicolás Maduro had stated that those responsible for planning the bombing are in the United States and that their “names, surnames, and location” had already been handed over to the Trump administration through the chargé d’affaires of the US diplomatic mission in Bogotá, Colombia, John McNamara. The Venezuelan president added that he has not given the order to make the information public, “but if necessary, we will, because we have the evidence.”

The president of the National Assembly of Venezuela and head of the political dialogue processes, Jorge Rodríguez, had warned last Sunday that the far-right opposition was preparing a false-flag provocation against the former US embassy building in the country.

https://orinocotribune.com/venezuelas-i ... s-embassy/

[blindpig]

WHAT IS RUSSIA’S STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT WITH VENEZUELA WORTH IF THE US ATTACKS


By John Helmer, Moscow @bears_with

Last week, according to the New York Times, the Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro was reported to have tried to head off President Donald Trump’s escalation to frontal military attack on Venezuela and regime change in Caracas by offering “a dominant stake in Venezuela’s oil and other mineral wealth in discussions that lasted for months, according to multiple people close to the talks.” Reportedly, Maduro’s terms included: “all existing and future oil and gold projects to American companies, give preferential contracts to American businesses, reverse the flow of Venezuelan oil exports from China to the United States, and slash his country’s energy and mining contracts with Chinese, Iranian and Russian firms.”

If Maduro did that, Russian sources concede hypothetically, it would amount to his revocation of Article 6 and Article 10 of the “Agreement between the Russian Federation and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela on Strategic Partnership and Cooperation”.

The first provision of the treaty calls for “joint initiatives within the framework of OPEC+, the Forum of Gas Exporting Countries and other multilateral organizations, [to] promote balanced and stable long–term development of global energy markets without using artificial restrictions and unfair competition tools”. The second proposed to “cooperate in the energy sector in such areas as the exploration and development of new oil and natural gas fields, increasing the returns of fields operated by joint ventures and reducing their environmental impact.”

Maduro signed the instrument of treaty ratification in front of the Russian Ambassador to Venezuela on October 7. But that was several days after Maduro had been told the Trump Administration had purported his scheme to replace the Russian oil companies with American ones, and had cancelled negotiations on Maduro’s term sheet led by Richard Grenell.

For the time being, there has been no ratification of the Venezuelan strategic partnership treaty by the State Duma in Moscow. When Venezuela’s Ambassador to Moscow, Jesús Salazar Velázquez, visited the Duma on October 6, ratification was discussed but not agreed. Instead, the official Duma communiqué reported that Velazquez had agreed with Duma deputy chairman Ivan Melnikov — a Communist Party faction leader who ranks third in the parliamentary leadership — to “express solidarity in countering Western military-political and financial-economic pressure. Both sides noted the importance of inter-parliamentary cooperation as part of bilateral interaction and discussed the possibility of holding a meeting of the Russia-Venezuela and Venezuela-Russia parliamentary friendship groups via videoconference in the near future.”

President Putin has twice stopped short of the opportunity to express his solidarity with Maduro. On October 2, during his appearance at the Valdai Club conference, Putin acknowledged that the French commando boarding of a tanker carrying Russian oil was “piracy”. Illegal yes, but Russia is not going to be provoked, Putin said. The French “want very much to transfer the tension from inside the country to the external contour, to excite some other forces, other countries, in particular Russia, to provoke us into some vigorous actions.”

Trump’s attacks on Venezuelan boats off the coast, which began in September and have been justified in Washington as an operation against drug smugglers, have not been explicitly condemned by the Kremlin. They have been called piracy by the Kremlin-funded security analysis platform Vzglyad.

At Putin’s last opportunity, in a press conference in Dushanbe on October 10, he was asked: “It has just been announced that Donald Trump did not receive the Nobel Peace Prize. In your opinion: should he have received it, did he deserve it, was he worthy of it?” By then Putin knew the prize had been awarded to the US backed regime-change candidate to overthrow Maduro, Maria Corina Machado. In his reply, Putin ignored Venezuela and praised Trump.

“It is not for me,” he said “to decide who should be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize… There have been cases where the committee awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to individuals who had done nothing for peace. In my view, these decisions inflicted enormous damage on the prize’s prestige. A person comes along – good or bad – and within a month or two, boom. For what? They had done absolutely nothing. Is that how it should work? It ought to be awarded for actual merits. Consequently, I believe, its prestige has been significantly undermined. But that is neither here nor there – it is not for me to judge. Whether or not the incumbent President of the United States deserves the Nobel Peace Prize, I do not know. But he has genuinely done much to resolve complex crises that have persisted for years, if not decades. I have said this before – I know for certain: regarding the crisis in Ukraine, he sincerely strives for a resolution. Some things have worked out, others have not. Perhaps much more can still be achieved based on the agreements and discussions in Anchorage. But he is certainly making an effort, certainly working on these issues – issues of achieving peace and resolving complex international situations.”

CCCP — cold comfort for Caracas from Putin.

What exactly Maduro had meant by “slashing” Russian contracts with Venezuela was not spelled out in the US newspaper report – if the offer had been made at all; the newspaper claimed to have sourced it from unidentified Venezuelan officials in Caracas, as well as from State Department and CIA officials in Washington who still talk to the New York Times. One of the Times reporters who wrote the story, Julian Barnes, has made a record of publishing whatever disinformation his CIA sources tell him, and never correcting the lies when he is found out. Whatever the terms may have been, however, they have been rejected by Marco Rubio as Secretary of State and National Security Advisor and by the CIA Director, John Ratcliffe.

Grenell, the principal US negotiator with Venezuela, was withdrawn by a Trump order on Rubio’s and Ratcliffe’s urging at the White House on October 2. The White House meeting with Trump that day was not identified in the official schedule, although an intelligence briefing for Trump, a once-a-week event, was posted. Trump may have been told after the decision had been agreed.


SecState Rubio (left) and D/CIA Ratcliffe (extreme right) at White House meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on July 7, 2025.

The White House meeting was followed by Trump’s tweet the next day, October 3, announcing that “a boat loaded with enough drugs to kill 25 TO 50 THOUSAND PEOPLE was stopped, early this morning off the Coast of Venezuela, from entering American Territory. “ The destruction of the boat and its crew was depicted by Trump in a 37-second video clip (lead images). No data were provided of the location of the vessel when it was attacked “off the coast of Venezuela”. Between that coastline and the Florida Keys, the nearest US mainland, is a distance of more than one thousand nautical miles.

Trump followed in a speech on board the aircraft carrier USS Harry Truman: “there are no boats in the water anymore. You can’t find any. We’re having a hard time finding them. But you know, it’s a pretty tough thing we’ve been doing. But you have to think of it this way. Every one of those boats is responsible for the death of 25,000 American people, and the destruction of families. So when you think of it that way, what we’re doing is actually an act of kindness. But, we did another one last night. Now we just can’t find any. You know, it’s the old story we — we’re do — We’re so good at it, that there are no boats. In fact, even fishing boats, nobody [Laughs] wants to go into the water anymore. Sorry to tell you that. But it’s, uh, we stopped. We’re stopping drugs coming into America.”


The two presidents, Putin and Maduro, met for talks and the signing of their agreement in the Kremlin on May 7, 2025. The Russian communiqué did not mention defence or military security. According to the Kremlin, Rosneft participated in the talks. “Taking part in the restricted format talks on the Russian side were Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, Deputy Prime Minister – Head of the Russian part of the Intergovernmental Russian-Venezuelan High-Level Commission Dmitry Chernyshenko, Presidential Aide Yury Ushakov, and Chairman of Rosneft Management Board Igor Sechin.”

According to the text of the Russia-Venezuela strategic partnership agreement, signed by Putin and Maduro on May 7 in Moscow, there was agreement on “rejection of hegemony” and opposition to US and NATO economic sanctions as “a manifestation of neo-colonialism, an instrument of pressure, economic strangulation, and undermining the domestic political stability of sovereign states. The Parties do not support or join the unilateral coercive measures used by individual states and their associations.” The treaty language is decidedly more Venezuelan than Russian.

Article 14 of the pact is more Russian than Venezuelan, and much less explicit. “The parties are improving defence relations in areas of mutual interest…The parties carry out military-technical cooperation in the interest of strengthening the defence capability and ensuring the security of the two countries within the framework of the implementation of existing agreements, contracts and facilitate the conclusion of new agreements.” This promised less on the Russian side than the arms supply and $2 billion loan according to the joint projects agreement signed by then President Hugo Chavez and Foreign Minister Maduro in September 2009.

Also, the new “strategic” defence provision is significantly less committal for Putin than the terms of the strategic treaties he has signed with North Korea (June 2024) and Iran (January 2025). Compare them by clicking here.


President Maduro and his wife on the Kremlin review stand at the May 9, 2025, military parade, seated next to General Secretary of the Communist Party of Vietnam Central Committee To Lam, and his wife.

According to Putin in his video conference with Maduro in March, “today, our relations have reached the level of strategic partnership. Mr President, today you carry on the Comandante’s cause, upholding your country’s sovereignty and steadfast course on close cooperation with Russia, which is traditionally built on the foundation of friendship, mutual trust and consideration of each other’s interests. For its part, Russia is doing and will continue to do everything possible to make our joint efforts in the trade and economic, scientific and technical, cultural and humanitarian spheres even closer and more comprehensive. I am pleased to note that the Treaty on Strategic Partnership and Cooperation between our countries has been fully agreed upon. It will create a good, solid foundation for the further expansion of our multifaceted ties in the long term. It could be signed during your visit to Russia at any time convenient for you.”

Putin omitted mention of the words, military, defence, security. What then did the “partnership” for “upholding your country’s sovereignty” mean?

In the past two decades Russian arms have been supplied to Caracas with crews, trainers and advisers. However, no Russian air force or naval units participated in the Venezuelan military drill in September. This compares with the deployment of Tu-160 bombers in 2018, during the first Trump Administration; and deliveries of weapons systems and crews in March 2019, and again in June of the same year.


September 20, 2025. This report does not identify any Russian weapons deliveries or deployments since the May agreement was signed.

US-based assessments of Venezuela’s current operational capacities are mixed. “Venezuela has an unusually varied collection of air defence assets, including smaller numbers of more capable systems. However, even most of the older surface-to-air missile systems have been upgraded and, as stated earlier, are generally highly mobile, meaning they can appear virtually anywhere, disrupting carefully laid mission plans. They could still pose a threat that would have to be taken seriously during any kind of offensive U.S. air operation directed against Venezuela…At the very least, it might be expected that the Venezuelan air defence picture would prompt the U.S. military to rely heavily on stealthy aircraft like the F-35, especially for any direct strikes on targets in defended areas of the country, as well as costly standoff munitions. Such a campaign would also require the support of defence-suppression assets and other support aircraft with their associated capabilities.”

In mid-2024, the Pentagon-funded Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington concluded that Russia’s readiness to support Venezuela in a military conflict with the US is more symbolic than substantial. “Russia’s actions in the Caribbean are a form of symbolic engagement with allies that typically challenges U.S. leadership in the region… in contrast to the United States’ tangible support for Ukraine, Russian actions have been primarily symbolic, demonstrating Moscow’s capacity to engage countries close to U.S. territory and highlighting Washington’s failure to isolate Russia globally. Yet, it also indicates that Moscow is comfortable operating in the Western Hemisphere, underscoring the potential for escalation.”

Oleg Tsarev — a leading Ukrainian opposition figure and candidate president for Kiev currently in exile in Crimea — has observed: “China and Russia…are major investors in Venezuela’s oil industry. China buys more than 90% of all Venezuelan oil, and is also one of the main creditors of Caracas. Russian investment exceeds $4 billion. In the event of an American invasion of Venezuela or a change in the foreign policy of Maduro, Moscow and Beijing are likely to lose their investments. Maria Machado, the newly minted Nobel laureate and leader of the Venezuelan opposition, has also offered projects worth almost $2 trillion over 15 years to the Americans. In general, the government and the opposition of Venezuela are now competing to see who will offer Trump more and appease him better.”

“But, as practice shows, attempts to buy off the Americans, if they are firmly focused on regime change, do not lead to anything good. Maduro would be especially foolish to sacrifice relations with China and Russia at the request of the United States. This will only hasten his end if Trump nevertheless gives the go-ahead for a change of power in Caracas.” – October 11.

https://johnhelmer.net/what-is-russias- ... more-92538

Maduro was foolish to wave money under Trump's nose. Often that works wonders, but as Maduro and his government have been labeled 'communists' the existential threat 'trumps' mere mendacity in the short term, the pieces can be picked up later.

[blindpig]

Venezuela’s PSUV Welcomes International Brigades to Defend Revolution Amid US Threats
October 13, 2025


Spain Civil War era poster honoring the International Brigades. Photo: Tribune Mag/File photo up-scaled by Orinoco Tribune.

Caracas (OrinocoTribune.com)—On Monday, Secretary General of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) Diosdado Cabello said that Venezuela will welcome support from people around the world to help defend the country from an imminent US military aggression.

Cabello’s statement came during the party’s weekly press conference in response to a question from Resumen Latinoamericano journalist Geraldina Colotti. She inquired about President Nicolás Maduro’s comments on Sunday regarding the creation of an internationalist militia brigade of indigenous peoples from the continent and asked if the PSUV would organize general international brigades similar to those formed to fight Franco’s fascist dictatorship during Spain’s Civil War.

“If we have not publicly called for the peoples of the world to organize to defend our country, I take this opportunity to do so from this moment, that from anywhere in the world, here is Venezuela, which is being attacked, and any help you can give us is welcome,” Cabello answered. “Here you will be received as brothers of life. Brothers of life. Love is repaid with love. That is what they say around here.”

The PSUV leader stated that Venezuela is facing a phase of aggression. “I do not know if it is phase one, two, or three of siege, because a war today is different from the wars of a few years ago and a few decades ago. We are in a war, are we not? Right now, since Commander Chávez arrived, they’ve been threatening us and taking action against the economy,” Cabello added.

A ‘false positive’ for war
Cabello explained that the US uses the “war on drugs” argument for military intervention in Venezuela as a “false positive” to manipulate public opinion and gain legitimacy.

He emphasized that if US authorities aspire to end drug trafficking, they should combat the narcotics transported along the coasts of South America toward the Pacific Ocean, where 87% of drugs are moved, and arrest the US cartels that supply millions of US consumers, rather than unjustifiably threatening Venezuela.

The PSUV secretary general noted that Venezuela uses all diplomatic mechanisms to avoid violent conflict. He said that since Commander Hugo Chávez came to power, the country has been characterized by promoting peace diplomacy. Therefore, in the face of the US government’s military deployment in the Caribbean, Venezuela requested an urgent meeting of the UN Security Council so that “if anyone was unclear about the scope of the siege, they will now be clear.”

Military support from other countries
Concluding his statements, Cabello expanded on the question about international militia brigades. He revealed that military and police forces in the region, including from countries currently controlled by far-right forces, have sent messages of full support in case of foreign aggression.

“Military forces from the region have sent similar messages, telling us that if they [the United States] mess with Venezuela, they will support Venezuela. We have received this from military forces, from countries… not necessarily with governments close to us, that if there is an aggression against Venezuela, they will show up to support Venezuela,” Cabello said.

He added that “indigenous peoples and military and police forces from other countries will come to Venezuela to support the homeland, which has done nothing but work in peace.”

https://orinocotribune.com/venezuelas-p ... s-threats/

Mexico’s President to Skip Summit of the Americas, Decries Exclusion of Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela
October 13, 2025


Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum during her daily press conference (Las Mañaneras) in the National Palace on Monday, October 13, 2025. Photo: Saúl López Escorcia/Mexican Presidency.

Caracas (OrinocoTribune.com)—On Monday, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum confirmed that she will not attend the next Summit of the Americas, scheduled for December 4 and 5 in the Dominican Republic. She expressed her disagreement with the exclusion of Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela.

During her daily press conference at the National Palace, the president stated that domestic issues preclude her attendance, adding that her government is considering whether to send other Mexican representation.

“Firstly, we do not agree with excluding any country, but also, under the current circumstances, no. We must focus on the country, and particularly the emergency,” Sheinbaum said. She was referring to recent floods caused by heavy rains in Veracruz, Hidalgo, Puebla, Querétaro, and San Luis Potosí, which have so far caused 64 deaths with 65 people still missing.

In a statement released September 30, the Dominican Foreign Ministry attributed the exclusion of Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela to “the current context of political polarization.” President Luis Abinader’s government said it decided to “prioritize the success of the meeting, extending the invitation to as many countries as possible.”

The statement claimed that Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela are “countries that, for various reasons, have decided not to join the OAS,” and “also did not participate in the last edition of the Summit of the Americas.” In reality, they were initially excluded by the United States government—led by then-President Joe Biden—during the 2022 summit in Los Angeles, California. The previous Mexican president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, also boycotted that summit in protest.

The Summit of the Americas is a diplomatic gathering of Latin American and Caribbean heads of state. It bears a clear “made in the US empire” imprint, as most of its organization and logistics are handled by the US Department of State via the now nearly defunct Organization of American States (OAS). Since its inception at the first summit in Miami, Florida, in 1994, the meeting has functioned as a US colonial tool to control the region it considers its backyard.

Bolivia, too
Last week, the Bolivian government joined in condemning the exclusion of Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, expressing its categorical repudiation of the move.

In an official statement, La Paz stated that excluding Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua contradicts the principles of respect, inclusion, self-determination, and non-interference in the internal affairs of states. These are essential foundations of international law and regional multilateralism.

“The Summit of the Americas must be constituted in a space for meeting and political dialogue without exclusions, aimed at promoting cooperation, regional integration, and respect for States’ ideological and political diversity,” the Bolivian Foreign Ministry’s statement said.

https://orinocotribune.com/mexican-pres ... venezuela/

******

Venezuela moves towards the second phase of economic stabilization

This stage focuses on full production and import substitution, in response to external aggressions.


The president highlighted the national consensus for peace and in rejection of foreign military threats. Photo: Presidential Press.

October 13, 2025 Hour: 10:55 pm

The President of Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro, announced on Monday the preparation of the second phase of stabilization of the country’s new economic model.

This stage focuses on achieving full production and radical import substitution, as a response to external aggressions that seek to damage the national economy.

“Fortunately, we have a new economic model that is quite robust, we have an economic policy in constant monitoring,” the Bolivarian president said on the Con Maduro+ program, acknowledging that there are still challenges to fully balance the model.

In dialogue with journalist Miguel Ángel Pérez Pirela, the president stressed that, despite external threats, businesses are stocked and the population maintains tranquility, which belies narratives of an alleged economic collapse.

The Venezuelan leader emphasized that the goal of the recent “psychological warfare offensive and military threat” was to harm the economy. In contrast, he highlighted the resilience of the country’s economic structure.


Nicolás Maduro reported on his visit to the VI Biennial of the South in Caracas, where he toured an exhibition of national and international artists.

After the tour, he highlighted the role of art as a vehicle for world peace. In addition, he projected a last quarter of 2025 marked by work, job creation and full supply, ensuring “a happy Christmas, with family and community”.

The president highlighted the national consensus for peace and the rejection of foreign military threats, noting that “more than 90% of the country rejects an invasion of Venezuela.”

In this sense, he highlighted the existence of “a national consensus to defend the right to peace and the future of Venezuela.”

Even the democratic opposition, he added, supports efforts for national dialogue and the defense of Venezuelan identity, condemning the actions of the oligarchy against the country. He welcomed “the calls for national peace” from these political formations.

Activation of Integral Defense Zones Continues

In the early hours of this Tuesday, the Integral Defense Zone (ZODI) will be activated in the states of Nueva Esparta, Sucre and Delta Amacuro, as part of the strategic exercises for the defense of sovereignty Independence 200.

“They already have the order,” said the president, who assured that this process will be “every day until we complete by state, by Integral Defense Zone, all that are the 27 tasks that are being perfected on the ground.”

In the face of U.S. military threats in the Caribbean Sea, the Independence 200 exercises seek that “Venezuela, in perfect national union, in perfect popular, military, police fusion, complying with our mandate of the Constitution, is prepared to continue winning peace,” said the Head of State.


On Saturday, October 11, Venezuela activated the Directing Bodies for Integral Defense (ODDI) in the eastern states of the country, including Monagas, Bolívar and Anzoátegui. The day before, the mobilization took place in Aragua, Falcón and Zulia, focused on the command, control and communication exercises ordered by President Nicolás Maduro Moros.

This deployment began last Wednesday in the strategic port states of La Guaira and Carabobo, as part of Operation Independence 200, instructed by President Nicolás Maduro to safeguard national sovereignty

https://www.telesurenglish.net/venezuel ... ilization/