标签： Trinidad and Tobago

The controversial extraction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro from Caracas by US forces has ignited intense global discourse, balancing accusations of sovereignty violation against humanitarian justification. While international observers report widespread jubilation among Venezuelan diaspora communities, critics of the Trump administration challenge the characterization of Maduro as a narco-terterrorist and question the evidence supporting claims of electoral theft.

The central philosophical conflict emerges from competing principles: national sovereignty versus moral obligation to intervene in humanitarian crises. Proponents of the intervention point to the unprecedented exodus of over eight million Venezuelans (21% of the population) during Maduro’s tenure as evidence of systemic failure and authoritarian oppression. They argue that when domestic institutions fail to protect citizens, external intervention becomes morally justified despite international legal conventions.

International law recognizes Venezuela’s continued sovereignty through its defined territory, population, governing institutions, and control over domestic affairs—regardless of electoral integrity. However, the practical application of sovereignty depends on diplomatic recognition, creating the current situation where Maduro maintains some international support while facing rejection from major powers including the United States.

The Trump administration frames its actions as responding to humanitarian catastrophe while simultaneously advancing strategic interests. The commitment to rebuild Venezuela’s oil infrastructure promises mutual economic benefit, though skeptics suspect resource acquisition motivated the intervention more than human rights concerns.

With Vice President Delcy Rodriguez assuming acting presidency while maintaining allegiance to Maduro, the political situation remains volatile. The administration has threatened further military action if loyalists resist transition efforts. As the United States temporarily manages Venezuelan affairs, global observers await November’s US election outcomes, hoping temporary measures don’t create irreversible consequences requiring reversal by subsequent administrations.

A pointed editorial critique has emerged questioning the Oilfields Workers’ Trade Union (OWTU)’s current stance regarding Venezuela’s oil sovereignty amid US foreign policy pressures. The analysis draws stark comparisons between the union’s historically principled position on Trinidad and Tobago’s energy independence and its present-day silence.

The piece recalls the OWTU’s legacy under George Weekes, whose iconic “Texaco must go” mobilization represented a defiant stand against foreign corporate domination of national resources. This historical context is directly contrasted with the union’s current position as the Trump administration pursues aggressive measures—including sanctions and threats of force—aimed at overturning Venezuela’s control of its nationalized oil industry.

Criticism centers on the perceived contradiction between the OWTU’s past principles and its present political alignment with Trinidad’s government, which publicly supports the US hardline approach toward Venezuela. The editorial argues this alignment has compromised the union’s independence and muted its voice on matters of economic sovereignty that once defined its mission.

The analysis frames Trump’s strategy as “economic strangulation masked as diplomacy,” characterizing it as a modern iteration of the same corporate domination the OWTU historically resisted. The fundamental principle articulated is that sovereignty cannot be selective—if foreign control of Trinidad’s oil was wrong, then foreign coercion of Venezuela’s resources cannot be right.

The editorial concludes with a powerful invocation of George Weekes’ legacy, suggesting that remaining silent on Venezuela’s sovereignty crisis while celebrating historical resistance empties that legacy of meaning. The piece serves as both criticism and call to action, emphasizing that history judges not only those who act but those who choose silence when principle demands resistance.

Tobago’s political landscape is embroiled in a heated dispute over development plans for No Man’s Land beachfront property, with PNM Tobago Council leader Ancil Dennis accusing the current THA administration of concealing a private development agreement until after the January 12 Tobago House of Assembly elections.

Dennis, the PNM candidate for Buccoo/Mt Pleasant, raised serious concerns during a January 6 campaign meeting in Bon Accord about what he describes as a clandestine arrangement between the THA and an unidentified private developer. The controversy centers on allegations that vendors at the government-owned No Man’s Land were visited by police-accompanied developers who demanded they vacate the premises by January 20.

THA Chief Secretary Farley Augustine has vigorously denied these accusations, maintaining that the Assembly was simply approached by a developer offering to enhance the area for vendors at no cost to the government. Augustine stated he instructed the developer to first consult with vendors before submitting any formal proposal.

Dennis expressed profound skepticism about these claims, stating, ‘No businessman will undertake significant development on prime beachfront property free of charge. There must be some arrangement—whether private or public—for somebody to benefit.’ He criticized the administration’s approach, emphasizing that proper procedures involving public tender processes and community consultation were completely bypassed.

The PNM leader outlined what he characterized as proper protocol: issuing a request for proposals, conducting transparent selection processes, and engaging in meaningful community consultation before any development decisions. He promised that a PNM-led THA would prioritize vendor livelihoods while preserving the natural beauty of the area, ensuring all current vendors could continue their trade in improved conditions.

Dennis urged voters to support the PNM to protect their interests, positioning the election as a choice between transparent governance and what he called ‘backdoor deals’ that threaten local livelihoods and public property rights.

CARACAS, VENEZUELA – Heightened tensions gripped Venezuela’s capital following a significant security incident near the Presidential Palace of Miraflores on January 5th, which authorities have attributed to communication failures between security units. The episode occurred mere hours after ousted leader Nicolás Maduro made his initial appearance in a United States federal court.

Multiple international media outlets documented anti-aircraft gunfire and unusual military movements throughout Caracas after dark. Security personnel stationed at the presidential compound reportedly engaged unidentified drones, though no casualties or material damages were officially reported. CNN subsequently circulated verified footage showing anti-aircraft tracer rounds illuminating the night sky above the city.

Venezuelan Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello Rondon conducted an emergency inspection tour throughout the capital, visiting key locations including Plaza O Leary to assess security deployments. Government sources described the overall situation as calm despite the alarming incident. Official communications from Rondon’s media program, Con El Mazo Dando, emphasized that security forces reported tranquility throughout their monitored zones.

The palace incident follows the dramatic capture of Maduro and his wife by U.S. forces on January 3rd from a Caracas compound, resulting in 32 Cuban casualties during the extraction operation. The transfer sparked international controversy and divided reactions across political spectrums.

Maduro entered a plea of not guilty to federal narcotics and weapons charges during his January 5th arraignment in New York, asserting status as a prisoner of war. Meanwhile, Venezuela’s National Assembly convened to inaugurate its 2026-2031 session, swearing in Vice President Delcy Rodríguez as interim leader.

In a late-night Telegram address, Rodríguez vehemently condemned what she termed the ‘kidnapping’ of Maduro, vowing to pursue national sovereignty through unity and peace. ‘I swear I will not rest until Venezuela achieves its rightful destiny as a free, sovereign nation,’ she declared, calling for collective action toward economic stability and social welfare.