The Naval Siege at the Centre of U.S. Strategy Against Venezuela
- Ernesto Cazal -
The scenario of
economic-financial-commercial asphyxiation imposed by the United States
government on the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela is one more piece of
the puzzle in the strategy of unrestricted warfare it is carrying out
against the Caribbean Basin country.
Specifically, it has repercussions on the
navigation chart of ships that are from Venezuela or have commercial
and other relations with the state and private companies. To support
such a suffocating agenda, the U.S. Navy has multiple deployments
around the globe, functioning as military police and mobile units
stationed for naval operations and military exercises of various kinds.
"By sea we can get to the site faster, stay there
longer, take with us everything we need, and we don't have to ask
anyone for permission," reads the Navy's 21st Century Naval Force
Cooperation Strategy.
The Pentagon's full-spectrum doctrine contemplates
a privateering for itself and its most trusted allies, and a military
restriction on anything sailing under Treasury Department-sanctioned
flags or threatening to castrate its plans, as well as those of the
White House itself.
In recent years, Venezuela has been harassed by
this strategy, which, together with the blockade imposed by Washington
and its consequences, and other operations in support of "regime
change," have led to a siege on the high seas and the Caribbean coast.
The Main Target: the Oil Industry
Recently, Reuters reported that oil tankers with
cargoes of oil ready to be marketed "have been trapped" for almost two
months on the high seas due to the fact that "the world's refineries
are shunning the South American country's oil to avoid falling into
U.S. sanctions, according to industry sources, PDVSA documents and
shipping data".
PDVSA's oil exports are Washington's main target.
At the same time that the Treasury Department
blacklists ships and traders involved in the trade and transportation
of Venezuelan oil, it threatens to add more to its list of "sanctioned"
entities.
Reuters quotes Refinitiv Eikon data:
"At least 16 oil tankers carrying 18.1 million
barrels of Venezuelan oil are trapped in waters around the world, while
buyers avoid them to avoid sanctions. That's almost two months of
production at Venezuela's current rate".
The agency says that some of the vessels "have
been at sea for more than six months and have sailed to various ports
but have not been able to unload. Oil cargoes are rarely loaded without
a buyer. Those that are in the water without a buyer usually sell at a
discount".
The financial burden on each tanker adds up to
large losses as the daily delay in unloading oil continues. The cost of
a ship carrying Venezuelan oil is at least $30,000 per day.
The oil companies that have PDVSA as a client have
not been able to find a buyer as a result of the unilateral coercive
measures. "Even PDVSA's long-standing clients are struggling to
complete transactions that are allowed under sanctions, for debt
payment or food exchange," one executive, speaking on condition of
anonymity, told Reuters.
This is a critical situation for Venezuelan
exports, at a time when most oil-producing countries continue to have
difficulty trading their high inventories in an over-supplied market.
All of this is helping the United States to reduce
the appetite of many buyers for Venezuelan oil.
Basically what the Donald Trump government has
achieved is to mount a naval siege on the Venezuelan crude oil trade,
preventing the state led by Nicolás Maduro from being able
to supply itself with foreign currency for essential goods and services
to the Bolivarian Republic and its population, while at the same time
undermining the oil industry managed by PDVSA.
That goal was clear from the outset, when Trump
decided to issue an executive order last year that deepened the picture
of economic, financial and trade "sanctions" against Venezuela. The
latest events confirm this thesis.
A Blow to Venezuela's Trade and Technological
Cooperation
A month ago, when the first ships from Iran were
crossing the Atlantic to the Caribbean coast to supply the Venezuelan
oil industry with gasoline and technology, U.S. spokespersons had
threatened to prevent them from unloading through the harassment of
Iranian cargo ships by the Navy.
But it is one thing to intimidate one country and
another to do so against two, especially if one of them controls the
Strait of Hormuz, the main commercial artery of oil in the world, where
one of every five barrels in the world passes through daily. That is
why the cargo ships arrived at their destination without any problems
beyond poorly executed psychological operations.
In this case, due to the emerging dynamic in which
there is a bloc in ascent that challenges the Anglo-imperial hegemony,
an effectiveness subordinated to Washington's interests was not allowed
in relation to the sanctioning strategy.
But what happens with other countries and
companies worldwide is a very different case. Let us take, for example,
the Venezuelan crude oil cargo ships that set sail for Malaysia,
Singapore, Indonesia or Togo, countries where the US presence is very
strong and which have not been able to buy oil produced by PDVSA as a
result of the unilateral coercive measures of the White House and the
naval surveillance conducted in those latitudes.
It is in these cases that coordination between the
Navy and the United States Department of the Treasury is necessary,
albeit informally.
Due to this strategy, up until February 2020,
Venezuela estimated 116 billion dollars in losses due to the blockade.
Provocations
In view of the latest developments, we can
conclude that the much heralded naval blockade against Venezuela
sponsored by the Trump Administration has been deployed in an informal
manner. It no longer functions in a frontal manner as it did in 1902,
when German, British and Italian ships surrounded the country then
presided over by Cipriano Castro, or even as they did against Cuba in
the 1960s, when the United States determined that island sovereignty
could not be erected in its "backyard."
By early April, a new phase of escalation of the
naval blockade had begun with the U.S. Navy's "counter-narcotics
operations" in the Western Hemisphere, opening up space for large-scale
psychological operations in the Caribbean and for coordination of
Southern Command forces and intelligence with Pentagon partner
countries, especially Colombia and Brazil.
It is in this context that the navigation of a
U.S. Navy destroyer near the Venezuelan coast last Tuesday, June 23,
should also be understood, which General Vladimir Padrino
López, Venezuela's Defense Minister, calls "an act of
provocation."
Padrino López warned that if U.S. ship
operations occur in Venezuelan waters there will be a "forceful"
response from the Bolivarian National Armed Forces. "Don't dare to sail
your warships in our jurisdictional waters, to carry out military
operations," the general added.
Although provocations are a tactic that the U.S.
naval army usually uses against its adversaries, crossing foreign
maritime boundaries not only in the Caribbean but also in other parts
of the world (such as the South China Sea or the Persian Gulf itself),
gringo generals generally authorize this type of operation to gather
intelligence and to cause concern. For which objectives: military,
commercial or even both?
Without a doubt, the pressure of the Southern
Command and its destroyers marauding in the Caribbean, combined with
the strategy of the Treasury Department, are building an encirclement
high and wide along the coasts that puts the Bolivarian Republic on
alert and economically injures the majority of us who live in Venezuela.
This article was published in
Volume 50 Number 26 - July 18, 2020
Article Link:
The Naval Siege at the Centre of U.S. Strategy Against Venezuela - Ernesto Cazal
Website: www.cpcml.ca
Email: editor@cpcml.ca
|