Editor's note: Wang Peng is a research fellow at the Charhar Institute and School of Marxism, Huazhong University of Science and Technology. The article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

In the early hours of January 3, 2026, explosions shattered the night sky over Caracas. The US launched a brazen, large-scale military action against Venezuela, a sovereign nation in Latin America. From the perspective of global energy markets, it is a "violent dismantling" of worldwide energy supply chains executed with cruise missiles and special forces as its surgical tools. The shockwaves are radiating rapidly from the Caribbean to every corner of the globe, heralding the advent of a more turbulent and unpredictable era for energy.

In the aftermath, US President Donald Trump proclaimed that major US oil companies would invest heavily to rebuild Venezuela's "severely dilapidated" petroleum infrastructure, while simultaneously asserting that the existing oil embargo on the country remained "fully effective." This contradictory rhetoric lays bare the dual core of Washington's action: First, the violent overthrow of a vulnerable neighbor's government, followed by its full integration into a US-capital-dominated energy empire in the Western Hemisphere. This transcends ordinary geopolitical maneuvering; it constitutes a fundamental subversion of the rules and balance governing the global energy industry. The profound implications manifest across three primary dimensions.

Firstly, from a supply chain perspective, this targeted restructuring of specific oil products exposes the fragility of the global energy system. While Venezuela's crude oil exports account for less than 4 percent of global trade, its heavy, high-sulfur crude oil possesses unique and irreplaceable characteristics. In the short term, the global market will struggle to find sufficient substitutes, which will not only drive up the premium for heavy crude oil but also force refineries to cut production, leading to a chain reaction of shortages in downstream products such as diesel and asphalt.

Secondly, regarding markets and pricing power, this military raid represents an extreme enactment of the Trump administration's "Energy Dominance" strategy, aiming fundamentally to reshape the rules of the game and control pricing. Since taking office, the administration has defined "Energy Dominance" as national policy, a concept extending far beyond mere "energy independence." It aspires for the US to be not only the largest producer but the dominant force and arbiter of global energy markets. The Venezuela operation marks a critical escalation of this strategy from economic sanctions and diplomatic isolation to a compound model of military-capital intervention. It aims to inject an irreversible long-term expectation into the market that the fate and resource development rights of the world's largest proven oil reserves will be directly governed by US power and capital.

Should this vision materialize, the US would unprecedentedly control both the world's most flexible production modulator (shale oil) and its largest strategic reserve (Venezuelan heavy oil). This grants a "dual-valve" capability: To exert daily influence by adjusting domestic shale output, and to execute strategic price manipulation by deciding when to inject or withhold Venezuela's vast resources. Consequently, the pricing logic of oil would fundamentally shift, moving from the traditional OPEC+ coordination and geopolitical risk premium model toward a new paradigm of "US policy premium" and "US capital preference discount." Any resource-rich nation whose interests diverge from Washington's would see the instability of its resource sovereignty pre-emptively priced in, creating a novel, deterrent form of "political risk discount." This constitutes a deliberate distortion of global market mechanisms and a blatant abuse of force under the banner of a "Trump Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine."

Thirdly, from the dimension of geopolitics and regional security, this action strips away the final pretexts of imperialism and risks triggering a fierce backlash of resource nationalism and regional crisis. Prior to the raid, President Maduro had written to OPEC, accusing the US of seeking to "seize Venezuelan oil by force," warning it will endanger global energy stability. The military strike validates this accusation and sends a chilling signal to all resource-exporting states: Their resource sovereignty is fragile against US power politics. This will inevitably compel other producers, especially those with complicated relations with Washington, to reassess the security clauses of their energy partnerships and accelerate diversification toward other partners as a counterbalance. Simultaneously, the US's flagrant invasion of a sovereign state and abduction of its leader in its "backyard" tramples on Latin American norms. It is likely to ignite not submission but widespread anger and fear. From Mexico and Colombia to Bolivia, regional powers have already rallied against hegemonic interference. This deep-seated antagonism will cast a long shadow over energy cooperation and integration across the Americas, potentially spawning new regional conflict flashpoints where energy infrastructure itself becomes a target.

In conclusion, the ultimate objective of the US raid extends far beyond the Maduro government. It is a strategic operation designed to violently dismantle and reconfigure a critical link in the global energy chain. It inflicts immediate supply chain pain in the short term while sowing the seeds for a transfer of pricing power and deep geopolitical fracture in the medium to long term. As a high-stakes gambit to achieve the "Energy Dominance" strategy, it seeks to forcibly bundle the political sovereignty of resource states with global energy pricing, making oil prices increasingly a tool serving US strategic and capital interests. This poses a long-term threat to the economic security of all consuming nations and signals a perilous new phase where the global energy order may be remapped by raw power politics.

For major energy-consuming countries, including China, the lesson from this "violent dismantling" is clear: Over-reliance on single maritime routes or supplies concentrated in specific geopolitical regions carries risks that have escalated from the economic to the military-security level. Accelerating energy import diversification, vigorously developing domestic renewables, and building more resilient strategic reserves and supply chains are no longer mere policy options but imperative necessities for national energy security in this volatile new age. The explosions over Caracas have sounded an alarm for the entire world.

(Cover via VCG)