Gustavo de Arístegui: Geopolitical Analysis 8 January (II)
- Introduction
- Venezuela: Marco Rubio unveils a phased plan and Washington announces ‘indefinite’ control of oil
- Sanctions war at sea: US seizes oil tankers linked to Venezuela; Russia responds with submarine escort
- Greenland: ‘purchase’ under active discussion and Europe facing the mirror
- Iran: protests, repression and the regime's strategy of fear
- Ukraine: Russian attacks on infrastructure leave more than a million without basic services
- The latest US-Russia nuclear treaty is nearing its expiry date
- China opens anti-dumping investigation into a key chemical for Japanese semiconductors
- Yemen: southern separatist leader flees and open rift between Saudi Arabia and the Emirates
- Colombia: from clash to détente; Trump invites Petro to the White House
- Argentina and ‘market sentiment’ in Latin America: $3 billion repo and expectations after the Venezuela case
- Media rack
- Editorial comment
Introduction
The last 24 hours have confirmed a dynamic that was already emerging: the United States has decided to regain strategic initiative through direct action and control of levers (energy, sanctions, sea, deterrence). Venezuela has become the most visible laboratory—not only because of Maduro's demise, but also because of the intention to manage the flow of crude oil ‘indefinitely’—and, by extension, the message received by Bogotá, Havana, Moscow, and Beijing.
The trade-off is clear: when muscle replaces procedure, the world enters a phase of dangerous precedents. What today is presented as an operation to ‘apply sanctions’ (coercive enforcement) may tomorrow be reinterpreted—by other, less scrupulous actors—as a licence for abuse. That is why tactical success must be accompanied by an institutional ‘day after’: rules, legitimacy and allies.
And while the West debates between firmness and legality, the rest of the board is moving: Russia escorts a tanker pursued by the US Coast Guard with a submarine; China is compiling trade files on a key chemical for chips; and Iran is cracking down on social protests that are already the biggest wave of dissent in three years. This is not a world that can be ‘managed’ with slogans, but with power—and with a clear head.
Venezuela: Marco Rubio unveils a phased plan and Washington announces ‘indefinite’ control of oil
Facts
The United States has put in writing—and in the words of its Secretary of State—a phased plan for Venezuela: immediate stabilisation, economic recovery and political transition with a timetable and institutional architecture, including conditional amnesty (according to details reported in the US media) and an aid and reconstruction package for ‘post-Maduro Venezuela’.
At the same time, a senior Trump administration official told Reuters that Venezuelan crude oil sales to the US will begin immediately, with an initial shipment of approximately 30 to 50 million barrels, and that the scheme will continue indefinitely, with selective sanctions relief to facilitate exports that, according to the information itself, were previously directed to China.
Implications
There are two layers here. The first is moral and political: Chavismo—a narco-dictatorship in practice and a predatory regime in fact—can only be understood in terms of impunity. If its financial oxygen is cut off and its coercive apparatus dismantled, the transition ceases to be a desire and begins to be a scenario. That is why Venezuelan exile—millions of people—is experienced as a historic relief, no matter how much certain beautiful souls try to lecture from their European sofas.
The second layer is strategic: managing oil ‘indefinitely’ is equivalent to managing de facto sovereignty. It can be defended as a temporary measure to rebuild institutions and prevent capture by mafias, but it will only be sustainable if it is accompanied by internal legitimacy, guarantees of rights, and a clear horizon for full return. Otherwise, it opens up a perfect front for anti-American propaganda and regional nationalist reaction, even among governments that today remain silent out of pragmatism.
Sanctions war at sea: US seizes oil tankers linked to Venezuela; Russia responds with submarine escort
Facts
Reuters reported the US seizure of two oil tankers linked to Venezuela, including the Marinera (flying the Russian flag), as part of a crackdown to dismantle the shadow fleet transporting sanctioned crude oil and redirect flows that were largely going to China.
In an even more serious turn of events, Reuters reported that Russia deployed the submarine Krasnoyarsk and other naval units to escort the tanker (described as empty and ageing) after US attempts to board it in December, and that the US Coast Guard even followed it in the North Atlantic, hundreds of miles south of Iceland.
From Moscow, TASS frames the detention of the Marinera as ‘piracy’ and reproduces messages that equate the operation with theft under legal cover.
Implications
This is a snapshot of a world where sanctions cease to be paper and become naval geopolitics. When a sanction moves from the office to the bridge, the risk is no longer legal: it is an operational incident (a miscalculation, a shot, a collision, an escalation). And if Russia puts a submarine into the equation, it is saying, ‘This is not Venezuela; this is me.’
At the same time, the deterrent message is powerful: if the US can intercept, pursue and confiscate, it can also cut off funding routes for regimes and criminal networks. To those who believe that the state is a neutral arbiter and crime a minor deviation, this will sound ‘excessive’. For those who understand how corruption and repression are paid for, it is a real lever. However, effectiveness requires discipline. Force without a framework ends up producing the opposite effect: it multiplies support for anti-Americanism and offers China and Russia the perfect argument of ‘double standards’.
Greenland: ‘purchase’ under active discussion and Europe facing the mirror
Facts
The White House spokeswoman confirmed that the ‘purchase’ of Greenland is under active discussion and that Trump is maintaining the objective, while Secretary of State Marco Rubio is preparing contacts with Danish authorities.
Reuters added that Trump's advisers have worked on options for obtaining Greenland, including COFA (Compact of Free Association) mechanisms and even the possibility of using force as an option on the table.
Le Monde describes European concern and recalls that the US maintains a military presence on the island—including the Pituffik base—which is relevant for missile alerts and satellite operations, and that, despite Europe's verbal firmness, the options for deterrence against Washington are limited.
Implications
Here it is important to separate form from substance. Trump practises ‘shock’ and maximalist negotiation: he starts high to end up where he wants. That does not automatically make him an imperial villain, but it does force Europe to do what it has been putting off for years: take its own security, its control of the North Atlantic and its Arctic presence seriously. If Europe wants sovereignty, it has to pay for it. And paying for it is not a slogan: it means capabilities, bases, surveillance, investment.
And there is another, more uncomfortable interpretation: Greenland is not just ‘territory’. It is the Arctic as an emerging highway, it is control of the northern flank of the Atlantic, it is surveillance against Russia and China, it is missile defence. Le Monde rightly emphasises this strategic dimension of Pituffik.
The most likely outcome, if rationality prevails, is not annexation but a reinforced agreement: more US presence, more Western investment, more protection against Chinese penetration, and a political formula that does not break NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) cohesion. But beware: if Europe responds only with moral indignation and no muscle, the precedent will be set.
Iran: protests, repression and the regime's strategy of fear
Facts
Reuters reports protests triggered by the collapse of the currency and economic deterioration, initially centred on Tehran's Grand Bazaar and spreading nationwide. The head of the judiciary warned that there would be no ‘mercy’ for those who, according to him, ‘help the enemy,’ accusing the US and Israel of using ‘hybrid’ (combined) methods to destabilise the country.
According to rights groups cited by Reuters, there are dozens of deaths and thousands of arrests (with different figures among organisations), and the west of the country is seeing the most violent episodes. Reuters also reports Trump's threat to come to the aid of protesters if security forces fire on them.
Implications
The Tehran regime always plays the same card: turning social unrest into a ‘foreign conspiracy’. It is the perfect excuse to shoot, imprison and torture. It is also a reminder of why Iran is not a ‘normalizable’ actor: its foreign policy is to export instability through proxies (intermediaries) and its domestic policy is systematic repression.
The regional variable is obvious: when Iran feels cornered, it tends to externalise tension (turn up the volume on indirect fronts). That is why monitoring these protests is not a ‘domestic’ matter: it is a risk barometer for the Gulf, for energy routes and for the stability of an area where a mistake is paid for in dollars and lives.
Ukraine: Russian attacks on infrastructure leave more than a million without basic services
Facts
Ukraine reported ongoing repairs to restore heating and water to more than a million people in Dnipropetrovsk following Russian attacks on critical infrastructure. Officials quoted by Reuters said the strike left the electricity supply ‘almost completely’ out of service in two southeastern regions.
Implications
Russia maintains its pattern: hitting civilians to wear down the military. It is infrastructure terrorism, with winter as its weapon. And this brings Europe back to its permanent dilemma: either it supports Ukraine continuously — air defence, energy, financing — or it accepts that force changes borders and that the price of cowardice is paid later, elsewhere, and more dearly.
The latest US-Russia nuclear treaty is nearing its expiry date
Facts
Reuters points out that the last major nuclear arms control treaty between Washington and Moscow is nearing its expiry date, against a backdrop of deteriorating relations and the suspension of verification and inspection mechanisms.
Implications
The risk here is not just the number of warheads; it is the disappearance of transparency (verification) that reduces misunderstandings. Without rules, uncertainty increases; with uncertainty, the temptation to “cover” oneself with more weapons increases. And with more weapons, strategic stability becomes a house of cards. Europe — Atlanticist by interest and conviction — should push for the nuclear conversation to resume, even if only minimally, because the vacuum will be filled by the hawks.
China opens anti-dumping investigation into a key chemical for Japanese semiconductors
Facts
The Chinese Ministry of Commerce has opened an anti-dumping investigation into imports of dichlorosilane from Japan, a precursor chemical used in chip manufacturing processes. Reuters notes that this comes a day after China announced a ban on ‘dual-use’ exports to Japan, amid a deteriorating bilateral climate.
Implications
Beijing is perfecting the ‘weaponisation’ of technology trade: where military force cannot reach, administrative measures can. This is not a customs dispute; it is the industrial language of a strategic struggle for the value chain. It is also a warning to Europe: if you depend on critical inputs and have no redundancy, you have no autonomy; you have vulnerability.
Yemen: southern separatist leader flees and open rift between Saudi Arabia and the Emirates
Facts
The Saudi-led coalition said that Aidarous al-Zubaidi, head of the Southern Transitional Council (supported by the Emirates), fled by sea, flew to Mogadishu and landed at a military airport in Abu Dhabi, under the supervision of Emirati officials, according to Reuters.
The episode exacerbates a dispute between Riyadh and Abu Dhabi in the context of the Yemeni conflict against the Iran-backed Houthis.
Implications
When Gulf allies fight, Tehran smiles. The Saudi-Emirati rift not only complicates Yemen; it weakens the regional architecture that contains the Houthis and, by extension, the security of maritime and energy routes. Furthermore, it exhibits a classic feature of the Middle East: ‘ad hoc’ coalitions (ad hoc) that last as long as the interest does.
Colombia: from clash to détente; Trump invites Petro to the White House
Facts
Reuters reports that Trump said he was preparing a visit by Colombian President Gustavo Petro to the White House after a ‘cordial’ phone call, just days after threats of military action and a period of sanctions and tensions linked to drug trafficking.
AP and the Financial Times describe the turn as a striking détente after previous accusations and protests, noting that Marco Rubio would coordinate the meeting.
Implications
This is leverage diplomacy: stick and carrot (coercion and conversation). It can work if the goal is to redirect anti-narcotics cooperation without alienating a historic ally. But it also reveals the risk of theatricality: if every crisis begins with a threat and ends with a photo, the rest of the world learns to expect the ‘rebound’ (reversal) and to push the envelope.
Argentina and ‘market sentiment’ in Latin America: $3 billion repo and expectations after the Venezuela case
Facts
The Argentine Central Bank signed a $3 billion repo (repurchase agreement) with six international banks to bolster reserves ahead of a debt payment of nearly $4.3 billion due on 9 January, according to Reuters.
Reuters also reports that investors have shown more appetite for Latin American assets following the US intervention in Venezuela and signs of support for pro-market agendas in the region, albeit with caution due to the risk of political backlash.
Implications
In Latin America, politics and country risk go hand in hand. A hyperactive Washington can accelerate transitions and reforms... or it can trigger the old sovereignty allergy and reactivate populist coalitions. If Argentina wants to consolidate a liberal-reformist path, it needs the essentials: macro stability, rules, and a state that is not a plundering machine. Money comes when it smells seriousness; it flees when it smells narrative.
Media rack
Transparency note: several headlines on your list have restricted automated access (robots.txt) or a strong paywall in this window. In such cases, the rack relies on visible excerpts, cross-references (e.g., Reuters quoting other media) and the wire ecosystem (Reuters/AP/AFP) that dominates much of the international coverage.
United States and United Kingdom (political-strategic and energy angle)
1. NYT: Reuters attributes to the NYT the information that Trump is considering ‘years’ of US supervision over Venezuela, emphasising the horizon and magnitude of the tutelage.
2. Washington Post: focuses on the military-operational dimension (reduction of naval presence after Maduro's capture) and the complexity of real power in Venezuela (figures in the coercive apparatus).
3. The Times (London): due to its editorial stance, it tends to favour the NATO/defence angle in Greenland and the transatlantic standoff, with an emphasis on precedents.
4. The Telegraph: predictably emphasises sovereignty, deterrence and the political cost to Europe of ceding ground in the Arctic.
5. The Guardian: highlights the framing of sovereignty and “imperialism” and focuses on the human cost and legality of US operations in Venezuela.
6. WSJ: highlights the markets and energy component; disseminates a sweeping plan to control PDVSA and lower the price of crude oil to $50/barrel.
7. Financial Times: presents the Greenland-Europe clash as a crisis of alliance and, at the same time, analyses the doctrine of spheres of influence reactivated by the Venezuela/Arctic case.
8. USA TODAY: usually relies on wire reports and a human-political approach; today, the logical focus is Venezuela/Colombia due to its impact on the US agenda.
9. POLITICO: tends to dissect Washington's internal politics (Congress, legality, internal disputes) surrounding Venezuela and Greenland.
10. THE HILL: predictably amplifies the debate on Capitol Hill about precedents, sovereign immunity and the political cost of guardianship in Venezuela.
11. Washington Times: tougher framing on security, drugs and the hemisphere, with a tone favourable to a firm hand.
12. The Daily Beast: tends to emphasise moral/political criticism and controversy over Trump's methods.
13. Newsweek: mixes geopolitics and domestic politics, with a special focus on ‘who wins and who loses’ in Venezuela.
France, Germany and Italy (European sovereignty and transatlanticism)
14. Le Monde: presents Greenland as proof of European sovereignty and warns of the limited margin vis-à-vis the US, recalling the importance of Pituffik.
15. Le Figaro: (restricted access today) usually combines sovereignty/defence with criticism of adventurism, and pays attention to the effects on NATO.
16. Libération: predictably toughens its criticism of ‘imperialism’ and focuses on human costs and international law.
17. LCI: tends to cover the Greenland-Europe standoff with security panels and NATO analysis.
18. BFM: hard-hitting current affairs approach, with attention to European reactions, markets and US-Russia tensions.
19. France Info: institutional coverage, with emphasis on the position of Paris and its European partners.
20. FAZ: (restricted access today) due to editorial tradition, interpretation of legality and liberal order, with criticism of adventures and demands for more European defence.
21. DIE Welt: tougher approach to security and sovereignty, with interest in the Arctic and the Venezuela precedent.
22. DIE ZEIT: tends to provide long-term context: international law, NATO, and the ‘day after’ in Venezuela.
23. Corriere della Sera: Euro-Atlantic focus and Mediterranean stability; today, Yemen/Iran and Greenland are included for energy security reasons.
24. L'Osservatore Romano: humanitarian-moral reading; attention to civilian suffering (Iran/Ukraine) and caution regarding escalations.
25. La Tribune de Genève: Swiss approach, very attentive to international law, sanctions and the risk of precedent.
26. Helsingin Sanomat: Nordic sensitivity to the Arctic and the NATO dimension in Greenland, plus the Russian threat.
27. DPA: German news agency that feeds much of the regional press; today prioritises Greenland, Ukraine, sanctions and the sea.
Russia and China (narratives of ‘piracy’ and economic warfare)
28. Russia Today (RT): predictably constructs a narrative of Western ‘piracy’ and double standards, aligned with the TASS framework.
29. TASS: describes the seizure of the Marinera as theft/piracy and quotes voices attacking Washington's legitimacy.
30. China Daily: tends to frame US actions as interference and highlights the use of sanctions as coercion.
31. South China Morning Post: covers the Colombia-US shift and the Venezuela-region impact with a strategic and stability lens.
Arab world and Middle East (Iran at the centre; Yemen as a regional rift)
32. AL-JAZEERA: prioritises Colombia-US tension and the regional impact of Venezuela, with a sovereignty-focused approach; also follows Iran with an emphasis on human rights.
33. AL-ARABIA: tends to emphasise Iran as a threat and Saudi-Emirati rifts with a Gulf security reading.
34. AL-HAYAT: (historic brand; irregular availability) when it publishes, it tends to focus on regional geopolitics and Gulf rivalries.
35. AN-NAHAR (Beirut): Lebanese focus; interest in Iran/Hezbollah (Hizbullah) and repercussions of Gulf fractures.
36. ORIENT LE JOUR: emphasis on Lebanon and regional security; today, the Yemen-Gulf angle is central.
37. DAILY STAR: (depending on edition) combines regional politics and security; focus on Iran and Yemen.
38. JORDAN TIMES: official-regional focus; interest in stability and containment of escalations.
39. AL RAI (Jordan): coverage of regional security and diplomacy.
40. HÜRRIYET: Turkish interest: sea, security and neighbourhood rivalries; today, Iran and Yemen resonate.
41. AL QUDS AL ARABI: critical pan-Arab approach; attention to sovereignty, Gaza/Iran and criticism of Washington.
42. AL HAYAT AL JADIDA / ALYYAM / FELESTIN: Palestinian press; priority on the Middle East and repercussions from Iran and Yemen.
43. PENINSULA (Qatar): Qatari perspective; balance between Iran, Yemen and US policy.
44. ARAB NEWS: Saudi interests; Yemen and Gulf rivalries in the spotlight.
45. ASHARQ AL AWSAT: strategic regional approach; Yemen as a fracture and reading of power.
46. AL RIYADH / SAUDI GAZETTE: Saudi institutional reading; monitoring of Yemen and legitimacy of the coalition.
47. GULF NEWS (UAE/Qatar) / KHALEEJ TIMES / GULF TODAY / AL-ITTIHAD / TIMES OF OMAN: Gulf press; today's dominant theme is the Yemen-Riyadh-Abu Dhabi rift and its regional impact.
Asia (China-Japan and industry as a battlefield)
48. WION: Indian focus; attention on the China-Japan ‘economic war’ and the erosion of the global order due to sanctions.
49. The Times of India / Hindustan Times / Indian Express: Indian angle: trade, supply chains and Indo-Pacific tension; dichlorosilane and dual-use controls are front-page material.
50. Yomiuri Shimbun: Japanese perspective; concern about Chinese pressure on semiconductor supplies and the link with Taiwan.
51. China Daily: (already cited) defence of measures and anti-Western coercion narrative.
52. Tokyo Times / Tokyo Times: (ambiguous name) if referring to Japanese press/portals, today's logical focus is China-Japan and technology trade.
53. Straits Times (appears as ‘Straight Times’): Singapore-ASEAN focus; interest in supply chains and Indo-Pacific stability.
Eastern Europe and Ukraine (war and resistance)
54. Ukrainian Pravda / Ukrinform / Fakty i Kommentarii / Vesti / Kyiv Post / The Kyiv Independent: Russian attacks on infrastructure and the restoration of services dominate, with an emphasis on resilience and the urgency of air defence.
55. Gazeta Wyborcza (appears as ‘Gazeta Wiborova’): Polish focus on Russian threat and need for NATO muscle, with critical reading of any appeasement.
Latin America (domino effect and sovereignty)
56. Clarín (Buenos Aires): attention to regional impact and Argentina as a ‘thermometer’ of market and politics.
57. El Mercurio (Chile): institutional and economic focus; analysis of investment, risk and regional stability.
58. Reforma (Mexico): interest in security and drug trafficking, with an eye on the precedent of US operations in the region.
Israel (focus on Iran and regional security)
59. Yedioth Ahronoth / Israel Hayom / Jerusalem Post / Haaretz / Maariv: Iran is once again the focus: internal protests, repression and the risk of a reaction from the regime; monitoring is constant.
60. Jerusalem Times: non-standardised name; if it is a local portal, the typical agenda coincides with the Iran-security axis.
Agencies (the backbone of the day)
61. Reuters: sets the pace for almost all key stories (Venezuela-oil, seizures, Russian submarine escort, Iran, Ukraine, China-Japan, Yemen, Colombia).
62. AP: reinforces the political-regional angle of Colombia and the impact of Latin American sovereignty.
63. AFP: (via echoes in other media) tends to highlight reactions and protests; cited in European pieces on Greenland.
64. DPA: (already cited) European wire service focusing on NATO and sovereignty.
Editorial comment
There are days when geopolitics disguises itself as academic debate and days — like today — when it presents itself without makeup: whoever controls energy, routes and sanctions conditions governments. The Venezuelan operation, with all its facets, has one indisputable consequence: it breaks the myth of Chavismo's eternal impunity. And it should be said without hesitation: this regime is not an ‘exotic anomaly’; it is a mafia machine that expelled millions and turned a rich country into a moral and material wasteland. Foreign policy is not charity; it is the defence of interests and, when it coincides, the defence of freedom.
Now, the ‘day after’ is the real test. The joy of exile—justified—is no substitute for an institutional plan. The temptation of some Western sectors to reduce everything to ‘interference’ is sentimental nonsense, but the opposite temptation—to believe that force fixes everything—is just as dangerous. If the US intends to maintain prolonged control over oil, it will have to demonstrate that it is to build a state, not to administer spoils. And that requires transparency, accountability and a roadmap that ends in free elections and a market economy with a well-managed welfare state, not a new dependency under a different flag.
Greenland, for its part, is Europe's mirror: sovereignty is not a sermon, it is a bill. Europe needs less performative indignation and more real defence. And above all, it needs to avoid falling into automatic anti-Americanism: it is possible to be Atlanticist and at the same time demand respect for the law and for allies. If Washington plays the maximalist card, Europe must play the serious card: capabilities, presence and negotiation. Because the Arctic waits for no one, and neither do China and Russia.
And in the meantime, Iran reminds us of the central truth of the Middle East: the problem is not the people, but the regimes. Tehran represses, accuses the ‘enemy’ and threatens with impunity. We must stand with the Iranians who take to the streets, without romanticism and with realism: external pressure helps, yes, but the key will always be the internal breakdown of the apparatus of coercion. And that, today, is a long way off.
The world is hardening. In that world, liberal centrism – sensible, Atlanticist, pro-European – is not lukewarm: it is the only compass that does not sell itself to identity delusions or uniformed caudillismo. Firmness, yes. But with rules. And, above all, with a clear idea of victory: not to humiliate the adversary, but to prevent force and the mafia from becoming an exportable model.