Drugs Are a Useful Weapon in America’s War Games

Opponents of the U.S. military operation gather outside the Manhattan Federal Court in New York City as Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro appears in federal court on drug trafficking and narco-terrorism charges following his capture and transfer to the U.S., on Jan. 5, 2026. Photo: Selcuk Acar/Anadolu via Getty Images

The war on drugs is best understood as a political metaphor. It is a thinly veiled tool of geopolitical warfare the U.S. has conveniently deployed to justify extending its hegemony across the world. And now in Venezuela, the U.S. war on drugs — that unwinnable forever war — is proving a useful fig leaf once again. What’s clear is that it’s the latest installment in the United States’ inglorious history of dozens of “regime change” efforts in Latin America over the past two centuries.

Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro found this out the hard way earlier this month when he was unquestionably kidnapped, and then indicted, by the U.S. for “narco-terrorism.” 

Maduro’s indictment claims he had “moved loads of cocaine under the protection of Venezuelan law enforcement” and “allows cocaine-fueled corruption to flourish,” citing alleged details of the deposed president’s direct involvement in cocaine trafficking. Ultimately, it seems the Venezuelan state has been able to at least partially manage the irrepressible tide of cocaine smuggling through the country, unlike some of its neighbors, and capture some of the criminal profits for security forces — leading to claims it is a “criminal hybrid state.” But perhaps this was a wise move. Sealing their borders is not feasible, and aggressive campaigns to disrupt the multibillion-dollar supply of cocaine inevitably leads to violence. 

Regardless of how allegedly involved the president is in the racket, it does not justify U.S. intervention. But the well-worn war on drugs justification has provided a useful Gulf of Tonkin-style lodestar. “We have a lot of drugs pouring into our country,” Trump said in September. “Very heavily from Venezuela. A lot of things are coming out of Venezuela.” But not enough oil — yet — he seemed to imply.

Beneath the overarching drug war bombast, Trump had preemptively justified the desired oil takeover by claiming that Venezuela nationalizing “our oil” was a historic theft from the U.S., since the American petroleum companies who “built Venezuela’s oil industry” were not compensated in perpetuity. Historians will recall a similar oil nationalization policy by Iran in the 1950s, which led the CIA to orchestrate a coup which overthrew the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh — who was jailed for three years and kept under house arrest until his death — and helped consign the country to decades of non-democratic rule, leading us right up to the present moment.

Given such historical precedents, the future looks bleak for Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, who is also set to stand trial. His arrest came after the U.S.had significantly increased its presence in the Caribbean Sea throughout last fall under Trump’s spurious pretext of dismantling the Venezuelan state’s alleged “drug terrorism” operation. At the same time, Vice President JD Vance ramped up the rhetoric against “scum of the earth” drug dealers from Venezuela, and Senate Foreign Relations Chair Jim Risch, R-Idaho, claimed each deadly strike against a boat supposedly ferrying drugs to the U.S. from Venezuela was saving countless American lives. Maduro warned Trump was “coming for Venezuela’s riches,” namely the world’s largest proven oil reserves, but his remarks were largely footnotes in the Western media.

Lo and behold, following the extraordinarily flagrant violation of international norms in the U.S. attack which led to the rendition of Maduro, Trump predictably pivoted away from the war on drugs premise to a might-makes-right quest to exploit Venezuela’s vast oil fields. Even while Vance clings to the entirely false idea that these war games will help ease the fentanyl crisis in the U.S., it is now clear that the killings of more than 120 people operating the alleged drug trafficking boats — likely including both actual fisherman and subsistence traffickers — was just the latest Trojan horse for self-interested U.S. meddling. 

“As everyone knows the oil business in Venezuela has been a bust, a total bust, for a long period of time,” Trump said after the pre-dawn capture of Maduro. “We’re going to have our very large United States oil companies, the biggest in the world, go in … and start making money for the country.” Left unclear was which country would benefit from all that money. It was an honest culmination of the effort to seize back effective control of Venezuela’s oil fields after the nationalization of the industry back in the 1970s seriously reduced Yankee influence. 

But there were high-profile examples of the media running with the oft-repeated drugs rationale, rather than oil. The New York Post almost entirely dodged using the word “oil” in its initial report. The Associated Press regurgitated the drug narrative, and Fox News hosts falsely claimed that drugs from Venezuela play a significant role in the rates of fatal drug overdoses in the U.S. 

Now the Trump administration admits that a non-U.S. ally simply cannot possibly be in control of the world’s biggest untapped oil feed — in some ways, a frank departure from Washington’s usual mealy-mouthed obfuscation. Clearly, like the Spaniards’ original colonial bans on Indigenous medicines, this was never about drugs. Cocaine is not the main driver of American overdose deaths; fatalities involving cocaine in the U.S. represent are much lower than those involving fentanyl, typically produced in Mexico from Chinese precursors, or opioids, which are manufactured in the U.S. legally.

The complete deception we were sold for months, however, was that drugs from Venezuela carried some sort of singular lethality, with the idea of the U.S. being flooded with seaborne drugs casting a convenient specter of immediate foreign danger. It was of no importance to the case that Venezuela has never remotely been a primary transit country for U.S.-bound cocaine, as just 10 percent of cocaine bound for the U.S. passes through the country. 

The most sensible course of action would be to legalize cocaine and create regulated industries to control the trade of a drug that is both far from uniquely dangerous and one that millions of people enjoy taking, despite the serious and well-documented risks. But legalization would rob the U.S. of a useful means to subject the continent — and the world at large — to its deranged imperial will. 

The war on drugs has never really been about drugs: It is about power, colonialism, and profit. Trump made this all the more obvious with his recent pardon of the right-wing former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández — a real narco-terrorist connected to the Sinaloa Cartel who actually did help create a cocaine superhighway into the U.S. and was sentenced to 45 years in prison in 2024. Why? Because Trump wanted Hernández’s conservative ally to win the country’s recent presidential election. 

Narco-terrorism, it turns out, is less about cocaine and more about compliance. History is replete with examples of the U.S. being more tolerant of right-wing governments who are friendly with drug traffickers than with any such leftist governments. And yet again, oil is the truth waiting beneath the latest surface-level lie. As ever, the war on drugs has been proven out not as a policy failure — but a merciless policy tool.