US demands Venezuela return assets or face naval wrath

The Venezuelan government has denounced U.S. President Donald Trump’s oil blockade, calling his rhetoric “interventionist and colonialist” and accusing Washington of a long‑standing plan to seize the country’s natural resources. In a statement released on Tuesday, Vice President Delcy Rodríguez said Trump’s remarks revealed the United States’ “true intention”: to take control of Venezuela’s oil, land and minerals. The government rejected Trump’s claim that Venezuela had “stolen” assets from the United States and accused the president of violating international law, free trade and freedom of navigation.

The United States has ordered its naval forces in the Caribbean to prevent “sanctioned tankers” from entering or leaving Venezuelan waters, a move Venezuela describes as a naval military blockade aimed at robbing the country of its natural resources. Rodríguez asserted that the U.S. has always sought to dominate Venezuela economically and politically, regardless of changes in administration. In response, the Venezuelan government said it would exercise its rights under international law, its constitution and the UN Charter, reaffirming its sovereignty over natural resources and its right to free navigation and commerce.

Since September, the U.S. military has killed more than 80 people in attacks on alleged cartel boats, which Trump claimed were being used by the Venezuelan government to “flood” America with narcotics. Venezuela has denied any involvement in drug trafficking and characterized the strikes as part of a regime‑change plot to plunder the country’s natural resources. The government emphasized that it will not be intimidated by the United States and will defend its sovereignty and resources, declaring, “Venezuela will never again be a colony of an empire or any foreign power.”

The situation remains tense, with the United States and Venezuela at odds over the blockade and control of natural resources. The international community is watching closely, as the dispute has significant implications for global trade and diplomacy.