In a dramatic escalation of tensions between Washington and Caracas, the United States has seized multiple oil tankers carrying sanctioned Venezuelan crude, triggering a fierce backlash from the government of President Nicolás Maduro and raising questions about the true motivations behind the Trump administration’s latest pressure campaign. The events of December 2025 have thrust Venezuela’s embattled oil industry and the broader geopolitical struggle for influence in the Americas into the global spotlight.
On December 16, 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump announced a blockade targeting sanctioned oil vessels sailing to and from Venezuela. The move came just days after U.S. forces intercepted the M/T Skipper, a so-called “ghost” tanker transporting over a million barrels of Venezuelan oil reportedly destined for Cuba, according to AFP. The U.S. government declared its intention to keep the seized oil, valued between $50 and $100 million, further stoking tensions.
The crackdown continued over the weekend of December 20-21, when the U.S. Coast Guard, with support from the Navy, seized the Centuries, a Chinese-owned and Panama-flagged tanker carrying about 1.8 million barrels of sanctioned PDVSA oil. Monitoring site TankerTrackers.com identified the Centuries, and while an AFP review did not find it on the U.S. Treasury’s sanctions list, the White House asserted it contained sanctioned cargo. By December 22-23, the Coast Guard was also pursuing a third vessel, the Bella 1, which remains under U.S. sanctions due to alleged ties to Iran.
These seizures mark the latest phase in a four-month U.S. effort to tighten the economic noose around Maduro’s government. The Trump administration’s stated rationale is to disrupt what it calls a shadowy fleet Venezuela uses to evade sanctions and fund illicit activities. U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem told Fox News on December 23 that the tanker seizures send “a message around the world that the illegal activity that Maduro’s participating in cannot stand, he needs to be gone.”
The impact on Venezuela’s oil sector—which has already been battered by years of corruption, under-investment, and sweeping U.S. sanctions since 2019—could be devastating. Once a global oil powerhouse producing over three million barrels per day in the early 2000s, Venezuela now manages only about a million barrels daily, roughly two percent of the world’s total output. Chevron, operating under a special U.S. license, is the sole American company still authorized to ship Venezuelan oil to the U.S., accounting for an estimated 200,000 barrels per day.
However, the bulk of Venezuela’s exports—around 500,000 barrels per day—flow through the black market, primarily to China and other Asian countries, according to Juan Szabo, a former vice president of state oil company PDVSA. The recent blockade is expected to slash these exports by nearly half in the coming months, depriving Venezuela of critical foreign currency and tightening the economic vise on Maduro’s regime. Szabo warns that PDVSA’s limited storage capacity means even brief interruptions could asphyxiate the country’s already struggling economy.
While the Trump administration has stopped short of explicitly demanding Maduro’s immediate departure, the message has been unmistakable. “Maduro’s days are numbered,” Trump declared, echoing sentiments voiced by Nobel Peace laureate María Corina Machado, a prominent figure in Venezuela’s political opposition who has thrown her support behind the U.S. strategy.
The Venezuelan government, for its part, has responded with defiance and legislative action. On December 23, Venezuela’s National Assembly—controlled by Maduro’s ruling party—approved a sweeping measure criminalizing activities that hinder navigation and commerce, including the seizure of oil tankers. The bill, introduced and passed within just two days, imposes fines and prison sentences of up to 20 years for anyone who “promotes, requests, supports, finances or participates in acts of piracy, blockades or other international illegal acts” against commercial entities operating with Venezuela. The measure also instructs the executive branch to develop incentives and protections for national and foreign businesses facing piracy or blockades, and now awaits Maduro’s signature.
The legislative move is widely seen as a direct response to the U.S. seizures. During an emergency U.N. Security Council meeting convened by Venezuela on December 23, the country’s U.N. Ambassador Samuel Moncada accused the United States of acting “outside international law” by demanding that Venezuelans vacate the country and hand over its oil fields. Moncada asked pointedly, “What right does the United States government have to appropriate, to date, almost 4 million barrels of Venezuelan oil?” referring to the cumulative cargo seized during the blockade.
At the same meeting, U.S. Ambassador Mike Waltz defended the American position, arguing that sanctioned oil tankers “operate as the primary economic lifeline for Maduro and his illegitimate regime.” Waltz asserted, “Maduro’s ability to sell Venezuela’s oil enables his fraudulent claim to power and his narco-terrorist activities,” referencing the Cartel de los Soles—a term used since the 1990s to describe high-ranking Venezuelan officials allegedly involved in drug trafficking. The Trump administration designated the Cartel de los Soles a foreign terrorist organization in November 2025, and Maduro himself was indicted on narcoterrorism charges in the U.S. back in 2020.
The international community has watched the escalating confrontation with a mix of alarm and division. Many countries voiced concerns at the U.N. about potential violations of international maritime law and the need to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all nations, as enshrined in the U.N. Charter. While a handful of countries—including Panama and Argentina—have expressed support for the U.S. approach, others have sided with Venezuela or urged restraint and dialogue.
Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, a leftist leader with regional clout, has offered to mediate in the dispute, reflecting broader unease about the prospect of deepening instability in the region. Lula’s comments captured the uncertainty swirling around Washington’s motivations: “I don’t know if the interest is only in Venezuela’s oil,” he remarked last week, highlighting the complex interplay of economic, political, and strategic factors at play.
Indeed, the history of U.S.-Venezuelan oil relations is long and tangled. American companies have been involved in Venezuelan crude extraction since the 1920s, and many U.S. refineries are still optimized for Venezuela’s heavy oil. The relationship soured dramatically after former President Hugo Chavez nationalized the industry in 2007, seizing U.S. assets and prompting years of mutual suspicion and periodic confrontation.
Today, with Venezuela’s oil sector in freefall and the global market awash in supply, analysts like Carlos Mendoza Potella argue that Washington’s campaign is “not just about oil” but about broader geopolitical aims—namely, asserting U.S. influence in the Americas and countering rivals like Russia and China. “It’s about the division of the world,” Potella told AFP.
As the year draws to a close, the fate of Venezuela’s oil—and the future of its embattled government—hang in the balance. The unfolding standoff has exposed the tangled web of economic interests, political rivalries, and legal disputes that define modern geopolitics, leaving ordinary Venezuelans bracing for yet another round of hardship as the world’s great powers jostle for advantage.
