Skip to main content

What's behind Donald Trump's 'narco-state' accusation against Venezuela

By Manolo De Los Santos 

The US government has revived its campaign to label Venezuela a "narco-state", accusing its top leadership of drug trafficking and slapping hefty bounties on their heads for capture. This campaign, which only momentarily took a backseat, is a strategic fabrication, not a factual assessment. This accusation, particularly amplified under the Trump Administration, is a calculated smokescreen to justify a long-standing agenda: the overthrow of the Venezuelan government and the seizure of its vast oil and mineral resources. A closer examination of the facts reveals a country that has actively fought drug trafficking on its own terms and a US government with a clear and consistent history of destabilizing independent countries in Latin America.
In 2005, a pivotal moment in Venezuela’s anti-drug strategy occurred when then-President Hugo Chávez expelled the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), accusing the agency of espionage and undermining Venezuelan sovereignty. This decision was based on Chávez’s belief that the DEA was "used as a cover... to carry out intelligence work in Venezuela against this government." At the time, Venezuelan officials insisted that the country would continue to fight drug trafficking on its own. “The DEA is not essential to the fight in Venezuela against drug trafficking. We will keep working with international organizations against drugs,” Chávez declared.
Contrary to the US narrative that this action would lead to a flood of drugs, Venezuela's government, through its National Anti-Narcotics Office (ONA) and the Bolivarian National Armed Forces (FANB), intensified its own counternarcotics efforts. According to Venezuela’s National Anti-Drug Superintendency (SUNAD), the country has made significant drug seizures over the years. For example, in 2015, the US 's very own State Department quoted ONA as reporting seizing 65.76 metric tons of illegal drugs during the first eight months of the year, a 132% increase compared to the same period in 2014. Cocaine and marijuana comprised the overwhelming majority of the seizures. Venezuela has also cooperated with other countries, signing an international agreement with Russia to fight drug trafficking in 2014.
While the US government has frequently labeled Venezuela as a "major drug transit country," this characterization often ignores the nation's proactive measures and its geographic reality. The country’s extensive and porous border with Colombia, the world's largest cocaine producer, which hosts seven US military bases and three DEA offices, may make it a key transit point. Still, it is not indicative of state complicity.
A study by the Tricontinental Institute for Social Research and the Lawfare Observatory has in fact, found that after five decades of the "War on Drugs," the DEA has itself reported in mid-2023 that major drug trafficking organizations continue to operate globally. George Papadopoulos, Principal Deputy Administrator of the DEA, testified before the U.S. Congress that the Sinaloa and Jalisco cartels alone have "associates, facilitators and intermediaries in all 50 states of the United States". The study argues that this continental intervention on narcotics is part of an overarching plan for political and military domination over the Americas, from Alaska to Cape Horn, including the Antarctic, which has become a key point of global contention.
The Trump administration has elevated the “narco-state” accusation to an unprecedented level, using it as a direct political and legal weapon against the Venezuelan government. In March 2020, the US Department of Justice announced a stunning indictment against President Nicolás Maduro and 14 other current and former high-ranking Venezuelan officials on charges of "narcoterrorism," corruption, and drug trafficking.
Announcing the indictment, then-Attorney General William Barr accused Maduro and his colleagues of conspiring with a dissident faction of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) to ship tons of cocaine into the United States. Barr stated, “For more than 20 years, Maduro and a number of high-ranking colleagues allegedly conspired with the FARC, causing tons of cocaine to enter and devastate American communities." He further alleged that the Venezuelan leadership "obtained the support of the Maduro regime, who is allowing them to use Venezuela as a safe haven from which they can continue to conduct their cocaine trafficking and their armed insurgency.”
A bounty for Maduro’s capture accompanied this indictment, initially set at $15 million and since then increased to $50 million. This move, reminiscent of a bounty on a terrorist leader, was a clear effort to delegitimize Maduro and create a legal justification for his removal from power. It was an act of extraordinary political pressure with no precedent for a sitting head of State.
Venezuelan officials fiercely condemned the accusations as a "ridiculous smokescreen." Venezuelan Foreign Minister Yván Gil called the reward “pathetic” and a “crude political propaganda operation.” In a televised address, President Maduro vowed Venezuela would “defend our seas, our skies and our lands,” characterizing US pressure as “the outlandish, bizarre threat of a declining empire.” Venezuelan National Assembly leader Jorge Rodríguez also weighed in, stating the US had signed a "proclamation that will go down in the pages of international diplomacy as a display of infamy.”
The legal and rhetorical assault on Venezuela is not an isolated incident. It coincides with a clear military escalation. In April 2020, during the first Trump administration, the US president announced an enhanced counter-narcotics operation in the Caribbean, sending warships and deploying thousands of Marines toward Venezuelan waters.
This military build-up, combined with the bounty on Maduro, served a dual purpose. First, it was meant to intimidate the Venezuelan government and signal a readiness for direct intervention. Second, it was designed to distract from domestic issues in the US, particularly the administration’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. Then Venezuelan Foreign Minister Jorge Arreaza tweeted, "As the Florida people agonize over the pandemic, the Pentagon slanders Venezuela to promote Trump's re-election and secure resources for his war machine. They commit a crime against Venezuela and against their own country."
A new military escalation comes after the Trump administration recently signed a Pentagon memo on confronting drug cartels in Latin America, a directive that frames these criminal organizations as a national security threat. In a clear and present demonstration of this policy, the US deployed three Aegis guided-missile destroyers—the USS Gravely, the USS Jason Dunham, and the USS Sampson—to the waters off Venezuela. This is part of a broader operation involving approximately 4,000 sailors and Marines, along with P-8 spy planes and at least one attack submarine, intended to operate in proximity to Venezuela’s coasts.
These military maneuvers were met with sharp condemnation from leaders across the region. Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum firmly rejected the use of US military forces in her country, stressing that cooperation does not extend to “invasion” and that her government has no evidence of a direct link between President Maduro and Mexican cartels. Colombian President Gustavo Petro explicitly stated that he would consider any unapproved US military operation an "aggression against Latin America and the Caribbean" and that an attack on Venezuela would be seen as an attack on Colombia.
Venezuela meanwhile, has called for its more than four million militia members to mobilize across the country in defense of its sovereignty. It was the Bolivarian militia that captured mercenaries attempting to enter Venezuela in May 2020 to carry out a series of assassinations and wreak havoc in the country.
The deployment of warships and troops, along with the Pentagon memo, serves as a stark reminder that the “narco-state” accusation is a pretext for a hostile foreign policy driven by a desire to control a country with the world’s largest proven oil reserves. For people of conscience around the world, the defense of Venezuelan sovereignty is a crucial front in the broader struggle against US-led interventionism and for the self-determination of all nations.
---
This article was produced by Globetrotter. Manolo De Los Santos is Executive Director of The People’s Forum and a researcher at Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research. His writing appears regularly in Monthly Review, Peoples Dispatch, CounterPunch, La Jornada, and other progressive media. He coedited, most recently, Viviremos: Venezuela vs. Hybrid War (LeftWord, 2020), Comrade of the Revolution: Selected Speeches of Fidel Castro (LeftWord, 2021), and Our Own Path to Socialism: Selected Speeches of Hugo Chávez (LeftWord, 2023)

Comments

Anonymous said…
He's trying to distract from the Epstein files

TRENDING

Countrywide protest by gig workers puts spotlight on algorithmic exploitation

By A Representative   A nationwide protest led largely by women gig and platform workers was held across several states on February 3, with the Gig & Platform Service Workers Union (GIPSWU) claiming the mobilisation as a success and a strong assertion of workers’ rights against what it described as widespread exploitation by digital platform companies. Demonstrations took place in Delhi, Rajasthan, Karnataka, Maharashtra and other states, covering major cities including New Delhi, Jaipur, Bengaluru and Mumbai, along with multiple districts across the country.

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

CFA flags ‘welfare retreat’ in Union Budget 2026–27, alleges corporate bias

By Jag Jivan  The advocacy group Centre for Financial Accountability (CFA) has sharply criticised the Union Budget 2026–27 , calling it a “budget sans kartavya” that weakens public welfare while favouring private corporations, even as inequality, climate risks and social distress deepen across the country.

From water scarcity to sustainable livelihoods: The turnaround of Salaiya Maaf

By Bharat Dogra   We were sitting at a central place in Salaiya Maaf village, located in Mahoba district of Uttar Pradesh, for a group discussion when an elderly woman said in an emotional voice, “It is so good that you people came. Land on which nothing grew can now produce good crops.”

When free trade meets unequal fields: The India–US agriculture question

By Vikas Meshram   The proposed trade agreement between India and the United States has triggered intense debate across the country. This agreement is not merely an attempt to expand bilateral trade; it is directly linked to Indian agriculture, the rural economy, democratic processes, and global geopolitics. Free trade agreements (FTAs) may appear attractive on the surface, but the political economy and social consequences behind them are often unequal and controversial. Once again, a fundamental question has surfaced: who will benefit from this agreement, and who will pay its price?

Paper guarantees, real hardship: How budget 2026–27 abandons rural India

By Vikas Meshram   In the history of Indian democracy, the Union government’s annual budget has always carried great significance. However, the 2026–27 budget raises several alarming concerns for rural India. In particular, the vague provisions of the VBG–Ram Ji scheme and major changes to the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGA) have put the future of rural workers at risk. A deeper reading of the budget reveals that these changes are not merely administrative but are closely tied to political and economic priorities that will have far-reaching consequences for millions of rural households.

Penpa Tsering’s leadership and record under scrutiny amidst Tibetan exile elections

By Tseten Lhundup*  Within the Tibetan exile community, Penpa Tsering is often described as having risen through grassroots engagement. Born in 1967, he comes from an ordinary Tibetan family, pursued higher education at Delhi University in India, and went on to serve as Speaker of the Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile from 2008 to 2016. In 2021, he was elected Sikyong of the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA), becoming the second democratically elected political leader of the administration after Lobsang Sangay. 

'Gandhi Talks': Cinema that dares to be quiet, where music, image and silence speak

By Vikas Meshram   In today’s digital age, where reels and short videos dominate attention spans, watching a silent film for over two hours feels almost like an act of resistance. Directed by Kishor Pandurang Belekar, “Gandhi Talks” is a bold cinematic experiment that turns silence into language and wordlessness into a powerful storytelling device. The film is not mere entertainment; it is an experience that pushes the viewer inward, compelling reflection on life, values, and society.

Frugal funds, fading promises: Budget 2026 exposes shrinking space for minority welfare

By Syed Ali Mujtaba*  The Ministry of Minority Affairs was established in 2006 during the tenure of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, following the findings of the Sachar Committee, which documented that Muslims were among the most educationally and economically disadvantaged communities in India. The ministry was conceived as a corrective institutional response to deep structural inequalities faced by religious minorities, particularly Muslims, through focused policy interventions.