U.S. President Donald Trump said on Monday night (29) that his country had carried out the first ground attack against Venezuela after months of intensified hostilities, allegedly targeting a port used “for drug trafficking.” The offensive, however, has not been confirmed in Venezuela, from where reports are beginning to emerge that contradict the U.S. tycoon.
“There was a big explosion in the dock area where they load the boats with drugs,” Trump said. “We hit all the boats, and now we hit the area, it’s the staging area […] and it no longer exists,” he added.
Trump did not specify whether it was a military or CIA operation, nor where the attack took place. He only said it was “along the coast” of Venezuela, which has about 2,800 kilometers of coastline (roughly the distance between the coasts of Rio Grande do Sul and Bahia in Brazil).
The U.S. president raised the issue when asked to comment on a radio interview broadcast last Friday (26), in which he appeared to acknowledge for the first time a ground attack against drug cartels in Venezuela.
“They have a big factory, or a big facility, from where they ship, you know, where the boats come from,” Trump told New York radio station WABC.
Sources heard by U.S. media outlets such as CNN and The New York Times said the CIA had carried out a drone strike against a port facility. The attacks reportedly caused no casualties, as the location was empty.
Asked whether he had spoken again with Maduro after a phone call in November, Trump said the two had spoken “very recently,” but that the dialogue had not resulted in “much.” Since returning to the White House in January, Trump has been advocating for a change of government in Caracas, which he accuses of narco-terrorism — a claim rejected by experts.
In recent months, the U.S. has sent about 10,000 troops and numerous military assets, such as aircraft carriers, to the Caribbean Sea near the Venezuelan coast. Americans have already killed more than 100 people, most of them unidentified, in about 20 attacks on small boats, claiming they were carrying drugs.
International law experts say such operations would constitute summary executions, and that the seizure in recent weeks of three Venezuelan oil tankers would also amount to theft under current law. In this context, an attack against a sovereign country would be the most recent illegal act committed by the Trump administration.
Skepticism in Venezuela
But was it really so? Venezuela’s Vice Minister for Anti-Blockade Policies, William Castillo, wrote on X shortly after Trump’s statements that the whole affair “seems fake,” although Caracas was investigating the alleged attack.
“There is no official confirmation of this supposed attack from the White House or the Department of Defense, nor have any details been released. Last night there was indeed a fire at the facilities of a private chemical company in the state of Zulia, in western Venezuela. It was a minor incident, quickly brought under control, with no injuries. The company issued a statement and continues to operate,” Castillo said.
“Do they want to take responsibility for the incident but dare not admit it? Are we witnessing an old trick with a new narrative, something like: ‘We destroyed Iran’s nuclear facilities?’” he asked.
“Nobody here believes it was the result of an attack,” the minister stated.
The company mentioned by Castillo was Primazol, which denied in a statement that it had been attacked, saying that a small fire had occurred on December 24 in one of its warehouses in the Maracaibo region.
“The fire was controlled with no injuries, categorically rejecting the malicious rumors circulating on social media,” it said.
The distributor of chemical raw materials and inputs said it was coordinating with local authorities on cleanup and assessment of the area affected by the fire, which was caused by an electrical failure.
“We clarify that the claims circulating have no relation whatsoever to the incident that occurred and do not correspond to official or verified information,” Primazol stated.
The company also said the versions being spread seek “to affect the prestige of the founder and the organization,” and reaffirmed its commitment to worker safety, respect for the local community, and fulfillment of its corporate responsibilities.
Speaking to BdF, researcher Carmen Navas from the Tricontinental Institute in Venezuela stressed that the Maduro government “has not issued an official statement,” and therefore there is no confirmation of any attack as reported by the press.
“Certainly there isn’t much to clarify. It is important to note that Trump was also not very explicit. He mentioned that there were attacks before Christmas and that they involved drones,” she said.
“This would mean that he is trying to be consistent with what he indicated months ago about authorizing the attacks, authorizing CIA actions and other methods, but it is certainly not the ground attack that the mainstream media has been distorting for weeks,” she added.
“President Maduro has activated all diplomatic mechanisms, from the UN to the convening of regional mechanisms, and has called for diplomatic dialogue based on respect with the government of Donald Trump,” Navas concluded.
Why are there no images?
Ana Maldonado, from the leadership of the Francisco de Miranda Front, a collective grouping of various Venezuelan popular movements, told the report that the U.S. president’s statements follow a familiar script.
“First, Trump says something crazy, like ‘we destroyed the bunkers,’ ‘the oil is ours,’ or ‘we bombed a drug den.’ Then U.S. government agencies and their media operators create a narrative that supports the absurd claim,” she explained.
“CNN has just released ‘details of the operation,’ but the problem is that they are so careless (or perhaps it doesn’t matter) that they get dates, places, and scenarios wrong. It is about creating realities derived from the Monroe Doctrine, from ‘manifest destiny,’ from the responsibility to ‘protect,’” she said.
Maldonado also emphasized that Venezuela has various ways to investigate the alleged attack, such as “activists and leaders on the ground, official spokespersons.”
“The climate is one of peace, alertness, and maximum readiness,” she concluded.
For Venezuelan professor Miguel Jaimes, an expert in petroleum geopolitics, the narrative pressure from the U.S. is also related to control over the Caribbean region and the oil that flows through that sea.
“Venezuela is part of a vast, glorious, and profound Caribbean. Venezuela was born from that ocean and over many centuries has waged a permanent and constant struggle to have a significant presence throughout this valuable area,” he told BdF.
Jaimes also doubts the veracity of the attack and says that “anyone with a cellphone could have recorded it.”
“So far, that’s not what exists. It hasn’t gone viral on any social network. If the attack had really happened, the world would be seeing images of it right now,” he believes.
