Latin American Publications!
A community for Latin American publications.
NOTE: All the publications in this feed are Latin American in origin; that does not mean they only report on Latin American news.
This article by Alejandro Alegría originally appeared in the January 30, 2026 edition of La Jornada, Mexico’s premier left wing daily newspaper.
Neither the Ministry of Energy (Sener) nor Petróleos Mexicanos (Pemex) issued comments regarding the tariff measures that the United States will take against countries that sell oil to Cuba
After US President Donald Trump signed an executive order imposing tariffs on goods from nations that supply crude oil to the island, La Jornada requested a statement from both the company and the Ministry of Energy (Sener); however, the Ministry of Economy’s communications department indicated that there would be no comment, as the matter was not within its purview.
This comes just days after Bloomberg and Reuters reported that Mexico had suspended fuel shipments to Cuba, which are used for electricity generation. Granma reported energy shortages, despite the island having around 49 photovoltaic plants, which are insufficient to meet demand.
In recent days, President Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo stated that the shipments to the island are for humanitarian reasons, which is not a new claim. She added that on other occasions, shipments are also made under existing contracts.
According to reports submitted by Pemex to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), since July 2023, its subsidiary Gasolinas Bienestar has been purchasing energy products from the company for sale to Cuba. Between January and September 2025, Gasolinas Bienestar exported 17,200 barrels per day of crude oil and 2,000 barrels per day of petroleum products, for a total of 7.9 billion pesos, equivalent to 400 million dollars.
Information released by the company indicates that these sales represented 3.3 percent of total crude oil exports and 1.8 percent of total petroleum product exports, respectively.
-
PEMEX & Mexico’s Energy Ministry Remain Silent on All Crude Oil Shipments to Cuba
January 30, 2026January 30, 2026
PEMEX canceled a scheduled oil shipment this month.
-
Trump Signs Executive Order: Punitive Measures Against Any Country “that directly or indirectly provides oil” to Cuba
January 29, 2026January 29, 2026
The US President wants to destroy Cuba and starve its population and he wants Mexico to help. Or else.
-
Can I Borrow You For A Minute? UK MP Zarah Sultana on Trans-Atlantic Anti-imperialism
January 29, 2026January 29, 2026
While oppression may take different forms in different places, the same forces are behind attacks on democracy in Latin America and assaults on civil liberties in the global north.
The post PEMEX & Mexico’s Energy Ministry Remain Silent on All Crude Oil Shipments to Cuba appeared first on Mexico Solidarity Media.
From Mexico Solidarity Media via This RSS Feed.
Caracas, January 30, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuelan Acting President, Delcy Rodríguez, welcomed the “lifting of restrictions on the country’s commercial airspace”, which had been in place since last November, following talks with the US government.
Speaking at a rally on Thursday, Rodríguez said she received a phone call from US President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio to address the issue as part of a “working agenda” between the two countries that includes the resumption of diplomatic relations.
“Let all the airlines that need to come, come. Let all the investors that need to come, come”, Rodríguez said. She assumed office following the kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, amid the January 3 US attacks.
Earlier in the day, Trump ordered the reopening of “all Venezuelan airspace” to commercial flights, stating that US citizens would be able to travel safely and that Venezuelans wishing to return—either permanently or temporarily—would also be able to do so.
Trump ordered Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy and other officials, including military commanders, to ensure the reopening was “immediate.”
Trump went on to describe the exchange with his Venezuelan counterpart as “highly positive,” emphasizing that “relations have been very solid and very good.” He further sought to reassure international travelers by stressing that they would be safe while in Venezuelan territory.
Following the announcements, the US Federal Aviation Administration confirmed that it had removed four Notices to Airmen (NOTAM) in the Caribbean region, including one related to Venezuela. “They were issued as a precautionary measure and are no longer necessary”, the agency argued.
Likewise on Thursday, American Airlines announced its intention to resume daily direct flights between the United States and Venezuela, becoming the first US airline to take such a step.
The company, which began operations in Venezuela in 1987, stated that the resumption of the route would be subject to approval by both US and Venezuelan authorities, as well as the corresponding security assessments.
American Airlines Chief Commercial Officer Nat Pieper said the company was eager to offer its customers the opportunity to reunite with family members and to generate new business and trade opportunities with the United States.
Direct flights between the two countries were suspended in 2019, the same year diplomatic relations between Washington and Caracas were severed after the US recognized Juan Guaidó as Venezuela’s interim president.
Last November, Trump declared that Venezuela’s airspace should be considered “completely closed.” A flurry of NOTAM warnings led international airlines to suspend their connections to the Caribbean country. Caracas withdrew licenses from several companies, including TAP, Iberia and Turkish Airlines.
On January 13, Panama’s Copa Airlines announced the resumption of flights to and from Caracas.
Embassy reopening in the works
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Wednesday during a Senate hearing that he expects the United States to reestablish a diplomatic presence in Venezuela in the near future. “We have a team there evaluating it, and I think we’ll be able to open a diplomatic presence soon,” he said.
Rubio argued that such a presence would allow Washington to “have real-time information and interact not only with government officials but also with members of civil society and the opposition.”
Laura Dogu has so far been appointed to lead the diplomatic mission from the Venezuela Affairs Unit in Bogotá, Colombia. According to CNN, the CIA is looking to establish a “foothold” in the South American country that may preced the formal arrival of US diplomats.
For her part, Rodríguez has defended her administration’s diplomatic engagement with the United States, while also urging Venezuelan political sectors to resolve their differences and internal conflicts without “orders from Washington.”
Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.
The post Caracas and Washington Agree to ‘Reopen’ Venezuelan Airspace, American Airlines to Resume Flights appeared first on Venezuelanalysis.
From Venezuelanalysis via This RSS Feed.
Caracas (OrinocoTribune.com)—Venezuelan Foreign Minister Yván Gil has publicly thanked the numerous progressive movements and international organizations from across the African continent that have condemned the US empire’s aggression against the Caribbean country.
In a social media post this Thursday, January 29, the top diplomat stated that the actions of the US represent a flagrant violation of national self-determination, and manifest as unacceptable aggression against the stability of a sovereign country.
Minister Gil’s post was in response to a joint statement released Wednesday, primarily by Pan-African liberation social movements, demanding the freedom of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Deputy Cilia Flores.
Gil remarked on the importance of international solidarity committed to the anti-colonial struggle and the calls for the release of the presidential couple, and honored their dedication of both of their lives to defending the sovereignty and self-determination of their people.
Speak, Speak, Whatever You Must Speak: Asian Solidarity With Venezuela
Below, you can read the full text of the joint statement and its signatories:
We, the undersigned organizations and movements committed to social justice, democracy, and international law, grounded in anti-imperialist struggle and peoples’ sovereignty, unite in unequivocal condemnation of the recent kidnapping of Nicolás Maduro, the constitutionally recognized president of Venezuela, by armed forces acting on behalf of the US government. This act constitutes an expression of imperial violence, representing a flagrant violation of Venezuela’s sovereignty, the fundamental right to self-determination, and the norms of civilized international conduct. It reflects a long-standing pattern of US interventionism aimed at ‘disciplining’ states that resist imperial control over resources, political systems, and development paths.
The abduction of President Maduro is not merely an attack on an individual, but a direct assault on popular sovereignty and the collective democratic agency of the Venezuelan working masses and the foundational principles of the United Nations Charter. It represents a dangerous escalation in the use of unilateral coercive force, and abduction as instruments of imperial power, and sets a perilous precedent that threatens the sovereignty of all nations. Such actions erode global trust and expose a contempt for the diplomatic and legal frameworks designed to maintain peace and order between states. Guided by reflection and inspiration from the principled statements and positions of progressive organizations and sovereign states across the world, we call upon the conscience of the international community to:
- Publicly denounce US imperialist aggression against Venezuela in all its forms, including military attacks on civilians, coercion, and regime-change operations. Demand accountability for violations of international law.
- Organize pickets and deliver letters of protest at US embassies and consulates worldwide, demanding an immediate end to aggression against Venezuela.
- Demand the immediate and unconditional release of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, and reject any act of state-sponsored kidnapping, detention, or removal of Venezuela’s elected leadership.
- Categorically reject all forms of foreign military intervention, intelligence operations, occupation, and regime change efforts in Venezuela.
- Uphold and reaffirm Venezuela’s inalienable right to political independence, self-governance, and territorial integrity, free from foreign intervention, occupation, or imposed authority.
- Insist that all disputes be resolved through peaceful negotiation and multilateral diplomacy. Reject coercion, subversion, sanctions, and the use of force as tools of international policy.
- Affirm that true democracy means allowing the Venezuelan people to determine their political and economic future without foreign destabilization or interference.
- Petition governments and parliaments to publicly condemn US actions and to sever all military, intelligence, and security cooperation with the aggressor.
- Sustain coordinated social media campaigns using hashtags such as #HandsOffVenezuela and #FreeMaduro to break the media blockade and spread accurate information.
- Hold popular assemblies, political education workshops, forums, and documentary screenings in communities, universities, and workplaces to expose imperialist strategies aimed at seizing resources and undermining sovereignty.
- Stand in active solidarity with the Venezuelan people and all nations resisting imperial domination, affirming that an attack on one sovereign people is an attack on all.
We express our unwavering solidarity with the people of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela in this moment of crisis. History teaches us that imperialism and foreign intervention breed only instability, conflict, and human suffering.
Grounded in Pan-Africanism, anti-colonial struggle, and South–South solidarity, as progressive forces, we reject this archaic doctrine of might-makes-right. We recommit ourselves to building a just world order where sovereignty is respected, international law is upheld, and the self-determination of all peoples is guaranteed.
Together, we affirm, ‘From the continent and beyond, our rallying cry is one: We progressive voices of the world, unite!’ Together, we shall end imperialism!
Hands Off Venezuela!
Signatories:
-
- Africa Collective, France
- African Youth Movement for the Promotion of the African Union Gabon (MJAPUA), Gabon
- All African People’s Revolutionary Party, Ghana
- ANJUD Association, Niger
- APP/Burkindi, Burkina Faso
- APP-diaspora/Benin, Benin
- Association for the Development of Angolan and Foreign Young People (ADJAE), Angola
- BISO PEOPLE Citizens’ Movement, Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo)
- Botswana National Front, Botswana
- Coalition of the Togolese Diaspora for Change and Democracy (CODITOGO), Togo
- Communist Party Marxist Kenya (CPM-K), Kenya
- Convention People’s Party (CPP), Ghana
- Cultural Committee for Democracy in Benin (CCDB), Benin
- FRAPP (Front for a Popular and Pan-African Anti-Imperialist Revolution), Senegal
- Friends of the Congo, United States of America
- General Confederation of Workers of Côte d’Ivoire (CGT -CI), Côte d’Ivoire
- Ghana Eye Report, Ghana
- Harbist Movement, Djibouti
- Headquarters of the Revolution, Mali
- Humanists Malawi, Malawi
- International Committee of Black Peoples (CIPN), France
- International Decolonization Front, France
- International Front for Decolonization (FID), France
- International Movement for Reparations (MIR), France
- Kanak Socialist National Liberation Front (FLNKS), France
- Mabedja Pan-Africanists, Comoros
- National Coordination of Citizen Monitoring Associations, Burkina Faso
- National Federation of Education (FNE), MoroccoPan-African Convergence, Cameroon
- Pan-African League – Umoja, France
- Pan-African Unitary Dynamic (DUP), France
- Pan-African Progressive Front
- Pan-African Youth of the Central African Republic, Central African Republic
- Party of Progress and Socialism (PPS), Morocco
- People’s National Convention, Ghana
- Planet of Young Pan-Africanists of Burkina Faso (PJP-BF), Burkina Faso
- Plate MdaiJasho – Agro Hip Hop Movement, Tanzania
- Popular Union for the Liberation of Guadeloupe (UPLG), Guadeloupe (France)
- Process of Black Communities (PCN), Colombia
- Progressive Movement of African Peoples (MPA), Guinea
- Socialist Movement of Ghana
- Socialist Party of Zambia, Zambia
- State55 Afrika, Cameroon
- The Maroon Circle, France
- The Pan-Africans Movement, Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo)
- Tunisia Forward Movement, Tunisia
- United Actions for Democracy (UAD), Nigeria
- United Textile Employees Union (UNITE), Lesotho
- Union of Populations of Cameroon – National Manifesto for the Establishment of Democracy (UPC-MANIDEM), Cameroon
- We Can Movement, Mauritania
Special for Orinoco Tribune by staff
OT/JRE/AU
From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.
Caracas (OrinocoTribune.com)—The acting president of Venezuela, Delcy Rodríguez, and the president of the US empire, Donald Trump, have agreed to reopen airspace over the South American country immediately, according to an announcement made by Venezuelan authorities.
Following a telephone conversation between Acting President Rodríguez and Trump this Thursday, January 29, it was confirmed that the illegal US blockade of Venezuelan airspace—imposed in November of last year—would cease immediately. The decision also ends flight restrictions imposed by the US regime in 2019 that halted direct travel between the two countries.
During a Cabinet meeting at the White House, the US ruler announced that he expects the measure to be effective by the end of the day. This now allows both US and Venezuelan citizens to travel between the nations with full security guarantees. The move ensures that the illegal US flight restriction over Maiquetía’s Flight Information Region (FIR) will be lifted, alongside the ban on direct flights.
The US air blockade, initiated against Venezuela on November 29, 2025, is part of a series of aggressions and attacks that culminated in a number of bombings on January 3 and the kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores. More than 100 people were killed during the US strikes, and more than 120 were seriously wounded.
“I informed her that we would open the airspace,” declared Trump to the press, claiming the improvement of diplomatic ties with Venezuela. “Very soon, citizens will be able to travel to Venezuela safely, and some Venezuelans who want to return will be able to do so.”
Analysts have noted that Venezuela has been open to normal diplomatic relations with the US entity since the era of President Hugo Chávez. However, they explain that the US has been responsible for the deterioration of relations through countless regime-change operations, illegal sanctions, and the blockade of the country.
The US ruler described the relationship with the current leadership of Venezuela as “very solid,” seemingly thanking her for her willingness to reach an agreement that will normalize commercial air traffic in the region.
Chavismo, the political force behind Presidents Chávez and Maduro, remains in tight control of Venezuela—as mandated by the Venezuelan constitution—backed by massive popular support that was mobilized following the unprecedented and bloody US strikes on January 3.
With the announcement, Trump was forced to acknowledge that his government was responsible for the illegal unilateral blockade of Venezuelan airspace. “This announcement marks a milestone in the bilateral agenda, prioritizing connectivity and citizen mobility under a framework of mutual cooperation,” a Venezuelan Presidential Press news release reads.
Recently, Acting President Rodríguez emphasized that, within a framework of respect and diplomacy, various bilateral issues will be addressed to guarantee peace and social well-being for both peoples.
American Airlines first in line
Once the announcement was made public, American Airlines announced plans to reinstate direct, nonstop flights between the US entity and Venezuela, becoming the first US carrier to do so. The airline explained it is currently completing the necessary procedures to receive flight permits and resume operations, following nearly seven years of being excluded from the Venezuelan market by order of the US government.
“American Airlines is proud to be the first airline to announce plans to restore direct service between the United States and Venezuela,” reads its press release. “The airline is in close contact with federal authorities and is ready to begin flights to Venezuela, pending government approval and security assessments.”
2019 US flight connection ban
The blocking of connections between Venezuela and the US was originally decided on May 15, 2019, during Trump’s first term, as part of the failed Juan Guaidó regime-change operation. After six years and eight months, Trump decided to lift the same restrictions he imposed, citing good relations with current Venezuelan authorities, Últimas Noticias reported.
The US ruler also praised the Venezuelan dignitary and claimed that their relationship is very good. “I want to thank the leadership of Venezuela. We get along very well with them. Relations have been very strong, very good,” he added, despite the new threats against Venezuela’s leadership made on Wednesday by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio during a US Congress hearing.
To demonstrate concrete progress in bilateral relations, Trump reported that US corporations “are now going to Venezuela, exploring and choosing their locations,” to undertake lucrative business ventures. “They will bring back enormous wealth for Venezuela and for the US. And the oil companies will be doing Venezuela a great favor; in fact, they will earn more money than ever before. And that is a good thing,” he claimed.
The announcement aligns with statements from Acting President Rodríguez, who has reiterated that Venezuela is open to good relations with all countries under principles of respect and goodwill.
National Center for Defense and Cybersecurity
Also on Thursday, Venezuelan Science and Technology Minister Gabriela Jiménez led a high-level strategic meeting with authorities from the Military Scientific Council. The meeting was held in order to create the National Center for Defense and Cyber Security, as had been requested by Acting President Rodríguez the day before.
In a press release, the Science and Technology Ministry reported that, in compliance with instructions from Rodríguez, the sovereign capabilities and operational readiness of the Bolivarian National Armed Force (FANB) were evaluated.
Jiménez emphasized that the National System of Science, Technology, and Innovation firmly assumes the comprehensive cyberdefense of the nation during this historical juncture. During the meeting, military commanders reaffirmed their commitment to guaranteeing the stability of the people and the security of technological infrastructure, through innovation and adaptation. Jiménez explained that science represents the “weapon for peace and the definitive independence” of the country.
The new institution integrates scientific knowledge with national defense, in order to safeguard the state’s digital platforms against potential external threats. Its objective is to enhance the FANB’s operational readiness by utilizing the technical contributions of the National Science, Technology, and Innovation System to create a robust digital shield based on national development and strategic intelligence.
Special for Orinoco Tribune by staff
OT/JRE/AU
From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.
On Wednesday, the US Secretary of State denied that the US was waging war against Venezuela. In the same appearance, he warned that he would oversee Venezuela’s “transition” and threatened to use force if “other methods fail.”
Marco Rubio appeared before the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Wednesday. “There is no war against Venezuela, and we did not occupy a country,” stated Rubio. “There are no US troops on the ground.”
Republican Senator Rand Paul, who describes himself as “the most anti-war person in the Senate,” highlighted the contradiction: “If a foreign country bombed our air defense missiles, captured and removed our president and blockaded our country, would that be considered an act of war?”
“Of course it would be an act of war,” Paul continued. “I would vote to declare war if someone invaded our country and took our president.”
Rubio dodged the question. He argued that the January 3 attack on a sovereign nation was “law enforcement,” lasted only four-and-a-half hours, and was carried out to capture someone whom the United States “does not recognize as head of state,” with a US $50 million reward on his head.
That day, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores were abducted by US troops following a military assault that left at least 100 people dead and more than 100 wounded, according to Minister Diosdado Cabello. Both President Maduro and Flores were transported to New York, USA, against their will, where they pleaded not guilty to charges of narcoterrorism.
Paul concluded his remarks by stating: “One-way arguments that don’t rebound, that you can’t apply to yourselves, that cannot be universally applicable, are bad arguments.”
Rubio’s contradiction did not end there. In his prepared remarks to the committee, he warned that the administration would use force “to ensure maximum cooperation if other methods fail.”
Two incompatible projects
While Rubio spoke of overseeing a supposed “transition from a criminal state to a responsible partner,” the president of the Venezuelan National Assembly, Jorge Rodríguez, outlined the country’s legislative priorities from the Federal Palace. One of these priorities remains strengthening People’s Power as a fundamental axis of the state.
These are two projects that cannot coexist. One, the US proposal—imperialist—envisions external control. The other—Bolivarian—deepens citizen participation in national decisions. The difference lies in principles: who determines the country’s destiny?
Acting President Delcy Rodríguez drew that line when she responded to statements by the US Treasury Secretary, which she described as “irrelevant and offensive”
“The people of Venezuela do not accept orders from any external force,” stated Delcy Rodríguez unequivocally. ” The people of Venezuela have a government, and this government obeys the people,” she declared before energy sector officials, legislators, and national and international business leaders.
Funds unlocked for social investment
Venezuela responds with action. Rodríguez announced the release of state funds that will be reinvested in social protection. “We are releasing funds to invest in essential equipment for hospitals, the electricity sector, and the gas industry,” she stated.
The government created two sovereign wealth funds: one earmarked for social needs and the other for public services and infrastructure. These resources had been frozen for years due to unilateral sanctions. Now, they will be channeled toward hospitals, the electricity grid, and the national gas industry.
Venezuela reaffirmed its willingness to engage in dialogue based on mutual respect and non-interference. Rodríguez insisted that any agreement must recognize the self-determination of the Venezuelan people and respect their democratic institutions.
Sovereign wealth funds allow the government to address national priorities without subordinating its domestic policy to external conditions. Caracas unlocks resources, invests in health and public services, strengthens people’s power, and reaffirms the fact that decisions about the country’s future are made by its own people.
Delcy Rodríguez Rejects US ‘Orders’ as Venezuela Advances Hydrocarbons Law Reform
(Telesur)
Translated by Orinoco Tribune
SL
From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.
The same day after a 40 minute phone call between himself and Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum, US President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order declaring a national emergency “and establishing a process to impose tariffs on goods from countries that sell or otherwise provide oil to Cuba, protecting U.S. national security and foreign policy from the Cuban regime’s malign actions and policies.”
- The Order imposes a new tariff system that allows the United States to impose additional tariffs on imports from any country that directly or indirectly provides oil to Cuba.
- The Order authorizes the Secretary of State and Secretary of Commerce to take all necessary actions, including issuing rules and guidance, to implement the tariff system and related measures.
- The President may modify the Order if Cuba or affected countries take significant steps to address the threat or align with U.S. national security and foreign policy objectives.
This week, a Bloomberg report said that a scheduled PEMEX shipment of oil to Cuba from Mexico was cancelled, leading to multiple questions for Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum during her morning press conferences. President Sheinbaum specified that there were two paths for oil to arrive in Cuba from Mexico: via PEMEX, and as humanitarian aid, and said that humanitarian aid to Cuba, which could include oil, was not cancelled but would not specify when the next shipment would be sent. A reporter asked, “Will the shipment of oil as humanitarian aid continue?,” and the President responded, “We have to determine that based on the request.”

Mexicans pay homage on the 173rd Anniversary of the birth of José Martí in Guadalupe, Zacatecas.
The peoples of Mexico and Cuba share a long revolutionary bond, from the post-revolutionary period in Mexico when Cuban communist and revolutionary Julio Antonio Mella was assassinated in Mexico City by Cuban dictator Gerardo Machado; to the Granma expedition of 1956, which departed from Veracruz for Cuba with Fidel Castro, Raúl Castro, Che Guevara, Camilo Cienfuegos, and 78 others onboard; including President Sheinbaum’s own grandfather and uncle, Chone and Solomon Sheinbaum, who were members of the Communist Party of Cuba in the 1920s, before being deported to Mexico; and to the many solidarity events which have taken place this week across Mexico, in honour of José Martí’s birthday.
-
Trump Signs Executive Order: Punitive Measures Against Any Country “that directly or indirectly provides oil” to Cuba
January 29, 2026January 29, 2026
The US President wants to destroy Cuba and starve its population and he wants Mexico to help. Or else.
-
Can I Borrow You For A Minute? UK MP Zarah Sultana on Trans-Atlantic Anti-imperialism
January 29, 2026January 29, 2026
While oppression may take different forms in different places, the same forces are behind attacks on democracy in Latin America and assaults on civil liberties in the global north.
-
Cuban Embassy Denounces US Blockade Tightening & Persecution of Those Who Help
January 29, 2026
Johana Tablada asserted that the Cuban people will follow the example of their national hero in defending the island’s right to choose its own destiny.
The post Trump Signs Executive Order: Punitive Measures Against Any Country “that directly or indirectly provides oil” to Cuba appeared first on Mexico Solidarity Media.
From Mexico Solidarity Media via This RSS Feed.
What does international solidarity mean in practice? In this interview, recorded at Progressive International’s “Nuestra América” conference in Bogotá, Kurt Hackbarth speaks with Zarah Sultana, UK MP and co-founder of the incipient left-wing party Your Party. International connections, Sultana argues, must grow from the reality of our interconnected lives: while oppression may take different forms in different places, the same forces are behind attacks on democracy in Latin America and assaults on civil liberties in the global north. What is at stake, she reminds us, is the fundamental right to self-determination in the face of imperialism. Calling out the UK for acting as a “poodle” of US foreign policy, Sultana closes with a call for all voices to join the fight against fascism — from political parties to trade unions to social movements.
-
Trump Signs Executive Order: Punitive Measures Against Any Country “that directly or indirectly provides oil” to Cuba
January 29, 2026January 29, 2026
The US President wants to destroy Cuba and starve its population and he wants Mexico to help. Or else.
-
Can I Borrow You For A Minute? UK MP Zarah Sultana on Trans-Atlantic Anti-imperialism
January 29, 2026January 29, 2026
While oppression may take different forms in different places, the same forces are behind attacks on democracy in Latin America and assaults on civil liberties in the global north.
-
Cuban Embassy Denounces US Blockade Tightening & Persecution of Those Who Help
January 29, 2026
Johana Tablada asserted that the Cuban people will follow the example of their national hero in defending the island’s right to choose its own destiny.
The post Can I Borrow You For A Minute? UK MP Zarah Sultana on Trans-Atlantic Anti-imperialism appeared first on Mexico Solidarity Media.
From Mexico Solidarity Media via This RSS Feed.
By Justin Podur – Jan 28, 2026
A review of the available evidence
Iran, the Sanctioned Economy
Before a military analysis of the demonstrations of January 1-15, let’s look at Iran’s economic problem and the origin of the December 28 demonstrations.
Iran faces a unique set of problems. Surrounded by US military bases, facing both the US and Israel that have stated that they want not solely its surrender but its destruction and partition, its scientists and military personnel facing assassination wherever they go in the world, its economy under one of the most severe sanctions regimes in the world with its oil and ships periodically stolen on the high seas. All the same, the people still need jobs and incomes and development.
Some Iran watchers fantasize that if Iran could convince Israel and the US of its peaceful intentions, that the West would lift the sanctions and Iran could have a normal economic life. Iranian American Virginia Tech professor Djavad Salehi-Isfahani expressed such a fantasy in a January 9 article, “The Economic Roots of Iran’s Protests”. The economist concludes: “Iran’s government cannot credibly promise to stabilize exchange rates or tame inflation any time soon. The one move that could offer relatively quick economic relief – and to which the government could credibly commit – is a cessation of hostilities with Israel and the US.” Leaving aside the moral bankruptcy of normalizing with genocidal Israel as a means of sanctions relief, the absurdity of thinking that a unilateral cessation of hostilities from the Iranian side would be met with anything but increased violence from the US and Israel should be apparent to anyone that has been awake for any amount of time in the past several decades (never mind since 2023). Salehi-Isfahani’s prescriptions – predictably for a mainstream US-based economist – are for “free-market” remedies: basically, letting the Iranian currency float. Like all neoliberal cures, this remedy would be fatal for the patient (which could be why the US prescribes it to its enemies). Netherlands-based economist Kayhan Valadbaygi argues that Iran has built a “welfare-warfare state”, but the problem is that it has done so “without a firm economic basis to maintain it.”
Many Iranian policy makers were educated in these US schools of economics and believe that if they can play by Western rules they can get sanctions lifted and enter a free market utopia. But as Nahid Poresa told Max Blumenthal of the Grayzone in an interview on January 22, a more realistic approach would be to accept the sanctions as a permanent fact of life instead of having false hope that they would be lifted, and commit fully to a “look east” economic policy with Russian and Chinese (also sanctioned) partners. To, instead of accepting the de facto dollarization of the Iranian economy, use the local currency to run the national economy and limit foreign exchange through capital controls. Iran already does many of these things: its multiple-exchange rate system is an evolution based on the sanctions situation. Industries have built a certain resilience in spite of – or perhaps because of – the sanctions regime which effectively shielded local industries from exposure to competitors. There is a barter trade with neighbours. There are subsidies for gasoline and bread. The Pezeshkian government’s challenge to these latter policies and the threat to cut some of these subsidies and to unify the exchange rate system – these are what led to the collapse of the currency and to the December 28th protests. Western-based economists looking at Iran argue the exact opposite: that the neoliberal reforms are the one good thing the Iranian government wants to do, and that the heterodox adaptations that have enabled people to survive the sanctions are deviations from orthodoxy that need to be removed. Like Israel and the US, these economists are trying to kill Iran.
Why would Iranian economic and political leaders go along with this? Financialization is the fashion and Iran’s banking system is growing more complex with a greater role for private banking and therefore opportunities for truly magical profits, as one Tasnim article from November argues (I read an auto-translation). A harsher assessment is provided by sociologist Yousef Abazari, who laments the naivete of Iran’s economic policy makers who don’t understand that economics isn’t science, that there are very different schools of thought in the field, and that the economics “experts” at the helm of Iran’s economy have the same fatal prescriptions that the Americans want – austerity, misery and oligarchy. Abazari asks sardonically, what’s the point of resisting America if Iran implements the same economic policies on its people? Iran has been attacked by many Western weapons, but among the worst weapons seems to be giving a Western economics education to many of Iran’s leaders.
Still, the most orthodox free-marketeers will turn to things like rationing, planning, barter, and capital controls as a matter of survival. Iran’s policies of solidarity with others in similar situations like Venezuela expose people to a diversity of methods for dealing with economic warfare. What most free-market oriented Iranian officials and Western Iran watchers agree on is that neoliberal austerity is the right direction, which is why it doesn’t come up as a subject of debate. It is the wrong direction.
Iran also needs a tech stack like China has to replace Instagram, WhatsApp, etc. so that people aren’t using US tech companies obsessed with their overthrow and assassination to communicate with one another. Iran has several allies that aren’t bent on its destruction and is full of educated scientists and engineers who make things work and can take the reins away from the Chicago boys. Iran could get out of this one yet.
The economic and university protests
On December 28, facing the end of the multiple exchange-rate system that immediately tanked the value of the local currency, economically motivated protests began against the loss of their purchasing power and a proposed austerity budget. There were more protests the following day and on December 30th, including at universities, where students also protested for their right to protest.
The Iranian president and other officials stated that they would change some of the proposed policies and look at better solutions to the economic problems.
That is the end of the economics discussion and of the economics protest. Beginning January 1, the nature of the protests changed.
January 1-15: A review of NYT and WaPo coverage
I reviewed the main news articles in the New York Times and the Washington Poston the protests from December 30 through to January 15. I was looking in particular at events described and the sourcing of the claims. NYT and WaPo are outlets that are against the Iranian government and in favor of US and Israeli policy towards Iran (regime change, destruction of the state, partition, etc.) I also reviewed all of the videos and comments posted by the pro-Iran aggregator @AryJeay on twitter, “Fotros Resistance” on telegram. I took screenshots of each important video and saved important text from the articles as a slight hedge against the impermanence of the internet.
There is little different between NYT and WaPo coverage in terms of politics, depth, or sourcing. None seem to have reporters present in Iran and bylines are from Beirut, Istanbul, or Jerusalem. Sourcing is often to “according to videos posted on social media”, which is a cheap way of covering world events. Both NYT and WaPo also quoted (if somewhat mockingly) Iranian news outlets such as Tasnim and Fars. There are also interviews with pseudonymous people who tell their ordinary stories of what they’ve seen, with last names not provided. Finally, for the all-important casualty numbers, US- and German-based human rights organizations are cited. The most frequently cited is HRANA, the Human Rights Activists News Agency. Alan MacLeod of MintPress news reported that the Fairfax, Virginia based organization received $900,000 in funding from the United States’s National Endowment for Democracy in 2024 alone. Also frequently cited is the Abdorrahman Boroumand Center for Human Rights in Iran (ABCHRI), also funded by NED, and the Center for Human Rights in Iran, also funded by NED.
On January 1, the NYT cited “footage circulating on social media” to describe protesters pulling a gate open in Fasa, chanting “death to the dictator” in Hamedan, closing their stores in Tehran chanting “don’t be afraid, we’re all together”. NYT supplemented their “videos showed” with an interview with “Yaser”, who saw protesting shopkeepers first hand at a bazaar in Tehran. On January 2, NYT stated that a 21-year old Basij militia member had been killed – the first casualty, on the government side, which the NYT sourced to Iranian government news agency Tasnim. On January 3, the NYT led with Trump’s Truth Social post: “If Iran violently kills peaceful protesters, which is their custom, the United States of America will come to their rescue. We are locked and loaded and ready to go.” NYT also cited Israel’s minister of innovation, Gila Gamliel, who posted to X, “Israel is with you, and we support you in every way possible.”
On January 4-5, coverage was dominated by the US raid on Venezuela and kidnapping of its president and first lady.
On January 6, the NYT reported that things had calmed down, and was reproducing Iranian news outlets describing the organization and violence of the protests of the previous day, mentioning “videos on social media” showing protesters firing assault rifles into the air while chanting “Death to Khamenei”. “But in Tehran, with the exception of the bazaar downtown, the university campus, and a few working-class neighborhoods, the city seemed normal, residents said in interviews and videos on social media suggested. Ski resorts north of Tehran were packed with affluent day trippers.”
But Reza Pahlavi made a call and an op-ed on January 6, calling people to overthrow the regime and calling on the US to intervene.
The peak days of the campaign were January 8 and 9, covered in the NYT on the 9th and 10th. On the 9th, the NYT was estimating 27-36 had been killed up to the 8th; also, citing NetBlocks, NYT noted that the internet in Iran had been shut down on the 8th. Notably, NYT cites no organization, no manifesto, no political demands, no slogans, no placards. Here is their description of the protests on the January 8th:
In telephone interviews, more than a dozen witnesses said that they saw large crowds forming on Thursday night in neighborhoods across Tehran, the capital, and in cities around Iran, including Mashhad, Bushehr, Shiraz and Isfahan. They said the crowds were diverse, with men and women, young and old. The people interviewed inside Iran asked that their names not be published out of fear of retribution.
One resident of Tehran said that the crowds were chanting, ‘’Death to Khamenei,’‘ referring to Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and ‘’freedom, freedom.’‘ The chants could be heard from several blocks away in the affluent neighborhood of Shahrak Gharb in Tehran, which had until now sat out the protests.
Videos filmed on Thursday night showed government buildings on fire across the country, including in Tehran, as protests grew. While the protests were mostly peaceful early in the evening, violence broke out later in the night in Tehran, with demonstrators setting fire to cars, buildings and items in the street. A video verified by The New York Times shows fires in the streets of Kaj Square in the capital, with thousands of protesters flooding the area.
In Karaj, a suburb west of Tehran, a video verified by The Times showed protesters fleeing after gunshots were fired, though it is unclear from the videos whether it was security forces firing.
On January 10, citing HRANA and others, NYT said deaths were in the “dozens” (up to January 9th).
After January 11, NYT depends increasingly on “Videos shared” as their primary source. On the 11th, notably, the highest estimate printed for numbers killed was 65 protesters. The Washington Post ran an op-ed by Reza Pahlavi stating that he was ready for a transition.
As the protests died down, the casualty numbers leapt. On January 12, WaPo cited a HRANA figure of 490 protesters killed. They backed this up with “A senior Western official who was briefed on the matter”, who “said hundreds were killed”. The official “spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to brief the media” (!) On January 14, WaPo came back with a HRANA figure of 2,000 killed, an anonymous source speaking from the suburbs calling it a “full-on war” but who couldn’t see properly because she “didn’t have my glasses or contact lenses”. On January 15, WaPo came back citing Bari Weiss’s CBS in an editorial by Marc Thiessen, “There is no US downside to striking the Iranian regime”, with new casualty figures of 12,000 and potentially as many as 20,000. Diminutive German-Iranian lobbyist for Reza Pahlavi, Amir Parasta, gave a figure of 30,304. Parasta also tweeted offering Iran’s assets to Turkey, and of course praising Reza Pahlavi.
January 1-15: A review of the videos
In order to fill out their pseudonymous interviews, NYT and WaPo freely cited Iranian news agencies. In the same period, pseudonymous pro-Iran social media account AryJeay / Fotros Resistance aggregated a comprehensive set of videos from Iranian news, cellphones, and CCTV footage. One aggregator, IntelonIran, estimated a peak of 11,000 demonstrators on the streets on the night of January 8, before the internet was shut down. According to this source, 11,000 was the highest number of people on the streets. The economic protests were long ended and the violent riots had been ongoing for a week, so it is safe to assume all 11,000 of these were people working for regime change.

The five ways of attack
Rather than repeat a chronology, I will compile the five different kinds of attacks that appear in these videos. I made a rough map of the locations of the attacks as well.

- The Jump. A crowd jumps a single bystander or security, beats him and/or burns his vehicle

January 1, location unspecified, rioters throw rocks at the home and burn the car.
Hamedan, January 1, rioters jump a security guard and beat him down (CCTV).
January 2, location unspecified. Shop owner, Ali Azizi, killed by 6 rioters.
January 2, Qom. Rioter sets a shop on fire.
January 4. Hamedan. Rioters jump a police officer and beat him.
January 5, Isfahan. 2 rioters jump a police officer and beat him with an iron bar. Cellphone footage.
January 7. Colonel Shahin Dehghan, Malard County near Tehran, stabbed to death.
January 7, Kermahshah. Rioters kick a man on the ground with his pants pulled down: this is a standard procedure, pull their pants down and then beat and kick them on the ground.
January 8, location unspecified, rioters jump a man and kick and beat him.
January 8, Ahvaz City. CCTV footage of a group of rioters overpowering an elderly man, beating him, and burning his car.
January 8, Noorabad County, Lorestan. Cellphone footage of rioters destroying a car.
January 9, Gohardasht, Karaj. Group of rioters jump a man and beat him. Cellphone footage.
January 9, Tehran. CCTV footage of armed rioters attacking a police officer.
- The attack on first responders. Rioters attack ambulances, fire, buses or emergency response vehicles

January 2, Tehran. Rioters attack an ambulance.
Between January 6-9, rioters burned several Red Crescent centers throughout Iran.
January 9, Mashhad. An Iranian firefighter burned to death.
January 9, Mobarakeh, Isfahan. Photo of a torched fire truck.
January 9: authorities report 15 buses burned on January 8-9, 600 signs and railings, and the Metro stormed in Mashhad.
January 9: authorities report 50 fire trucks nationwide – a fire station in Mashhad, 15 vehicle in Isfahan, 5 in Ahvaz, a fire station in Shiraz, and the Red Crescent Building in Izeh, all attacked over Jan 8-9.
January 10, rioters attack and burn a bus in Isfahan. CCTV footage.
January 10. Rioters burn several buses in Mashhad.
- Gun battles. A street gun battle between rioters and law enforcement

Kudasht, December 31. 13 officers injured, 20 armed rioters arrested, 1 police officer burned, one Basiji (22 years old Amir Hesam Khodayari-Fard) killed.
January 3, location unspecified. Cell phone footage of a rioter using a flamethrower against a police motorcycle convoy.
January 5. Yasuj. Armed rioter shoots at bypassers and security.
January 5. Koushk. Armed rioters attack a pro-government march.
January 6. Tehran. Clash between police and rioters in front of Sina hospital. Both sides claim the other threw tear gas on the street.
January 7, Charmahal, Bakhtiari. Close up footage of a masked rioter with a keffiyah covering his face and baseball cap shouting Marg Bar Khamenei and shooting off-frame with a shotgun.
January 8, location unspecified. Shooters ambush a police motorcycle convoy, shooting them as they drive by.
January 8, Kermanshah. Nightvision camera / CCTV captures shooters shooting (but not what they’re shooting).
January 8, Hamedan. Rioters kill a police major, Mohammed Javed Bakshian and 6 civilians. A news item on the aftermath shows destroyed buildings and some CCTV footage of the riots.
January 9, Tabarsi Boulevard, Mashhad. Rioting leads to deaths, including security forces’ Mostafa Abufazeli.
January 9, 8:50pm. Shushtar videos of rifle man and shotgun man, and of a female rioter with a machete.
January 10. Police claim to have killed 1 rioter in a firefight in Mashhad.
January 10. Police claim to have killed 1 and arrested 6 rioters in Ilam.
- Attacks on buildings or on people. Rioters shoot or throw Molotov Cocktails at public or private buildings or at security personnel or other people

Arak, December 31 night time, cellphone video.
January 3, Zahedan. Masked rioters loot a grocery store. CCTV footage.
January 6. Abdanan. Protesters loot a supermarket, Ofogh Kourosh, dump all the rice in the street, and take selfies (does this remind you of anything?)
January 7. Location unspecified. Rioters burn down a religious bookstore.
January 8, burning of a Basij seminary. Location unspecified.
January 8, Alireza, 17, shot and killed.
January 8, 2-year old Bahareh, shot in Shahid Beheshti street in Nishapur, died January 15.
January 8, 3-year old Melina in Kermanshah, going to a pharmacy with her parents shot by armed rioters.
January 8, location unspecified. CCTV footage of rioters vandalizing a bank.
January 8, rioters burn the shrine of Sabzeqaba, CCTV footage from various cameras.
January 8, rioters burn the Shahid Montazeri mosque in Shushtar.
January 8, 15th Khordad Square in Shushtar, rioters attack a passerby on a truck.
January 8, Ardebil. Phone video of armed masked rioters attacking a grocery store and a Sepah bank.
January 8, Ilam Province, village of Lumar. Rioters attack the Keshavarzi bank. Cellphone footage.
January 9, Mahdieh Mosque in Karaj. Rioters burn the mosque and Qurans in the mosque. Whose operating procedure is that?
January 9, Sabzevar, Khorasan. CCTV footage shows a Molotov attack on a civilian house.
January 9, Mobarakeh, Isfahan. Torched a grocery store, totally burned.
January 9, Sabzevar, Khorasan. CCTV of children running from a Molotov attack.
January 9, Gorgan, Golestan. Several shops and other areas torched.
January 9, location unspecified. Rioter throwing a Molotov at a civilian home.

- Attacks on state symbols. Rioters attack a governor’s office or police station.
Fasa City governor’s office December 31. Cellphone video.
Azna, Lorestan, January 1. Several police vehicles set on fire, 3 killed, 7 injured.
January 1, 9am. Lordegan Governor’s office. Masked rioters throw stones and shoot at police.
January 2, Police Station 11 Marvdasht (Fars Province), rioters try to seize the station and are scattered when police fire into the air.
January 3, Tabriz. Rioter uses Molotovs to try to set the Tabriz Chamber of Builds building on fire. Cellphone footage.
January 4. Malekshahi, Ilam Province. Rioters attempt to storm a Basij outpost and are scattered when police fire into the air.
January 8, 200 rioters with molotov cocktails attack the residence of Salam al-Zawawi, the Palestinian Ambassador. Who would want to attack the Palestinian Ambassador in particular?
January 8, attack on police station 126, Tehranpars. Police and Basij were killed.
New Mossad Recruitment Ads Exploit Iran’s Unrest With Help From US Comedian
No politics, organized on the internet
AryJeay commented: “In this year’s riots, we see no prior statements, organized gatherings, formal protests, or specific pre-announced locations. Suddenly, a group pours into the streets and riots in specific locations that are close to sensitive, infrastructural, vital, and security-military sites. They then steer the riot toward these locations in order to gain access to firearms and ammunition.”
Rioters always dressed in black and were masked. They moved around at night with confidence and fluidly knew how to burn motorcycles, take the rods off of street signs, wield machetes and swords, and use shotguns and rifles.
In confessions shown on Iranian TV, arrested rioters say they were recruited based on their online behavior and what kinds of posts they “liked”, then messaged and organized and trained via Telegram and WhatsApp, paid specific rates based on what kinds of attacks they could prove they did (using video evidence), and some were ultimately told they were of no value and shot by their handlers. “They had precise intelligence of coordination with separatists and terrorists on the part of US and Israel. “They even planned for each separated region to draft its own constitution, and they directed arms smuggling, as well as financial & logistical support.” The rates are around $6000 for killing people, $2375 for burning each vehicle, $850 for burning police stations, $175 for any other disruption.”
Other arrested rioters told news agencies that they felt they had been set up to die in fires, sent up into buildings to set fires only to find their planned exit blocked. Iranian authorities called this “project killings”, in which riot organizers killed other rioters with the intent of blaming the state for the deaths.
One arrested rioter said: “The same person who called for the unrest attacked me, and after some time passed, he shot me and said, ‘You’re no longer of any use.’” Team leaders pursued manufacturing deaths and provoking public emotions by killing their own operatives and rioters with close-range shots to the head.”
By January 10, likely due to the internet shutdown on the 8-9, the tide had turned and on January 12, there were massive demonstrations in support of the government (there had been these all along, including mass funerals, but this was the largest culmination).
Iran also jammed the Starlink network and reported arrests and unraveling of networks, safe houses, and seizure of massive numbers of weapons over the following days, before finally restoring internet connectivity more than a week later.

The Iranian medical authorities gave the following summary of all damage: 184 ambulances attacked and damaged. 6 completely destroyed and burned. Directly hit with bullets in Teheran. Molotov cocktail attack on an ambulance in Rafsanjan while on active mission. 54 injured. 4 hospitals attacked.
AryJeay gave the following roundup of property damage: 250 mosques damaged. 20 religious centers. Imamanieh mosque in Golestan province. Hundreds of vehicles burned in Teheran. 364 large stores. 419 small stores. Damage reported across 30 provinces. $5.3 million in fire department vehicles. $14 million in bank damages. 317 bank branches destroyed. 4700 bank branches damaged. 1400 ATMs damaged. 250 ATMs permanently out of service. $6.6 million in damages to electricity sector. 265 schools damaged. 3 libraries set on fire. 8 cultural heritage sites damaged. 4 cinemas (Tehran, Nishapur, Boruejd, Shahin Shahr).
Ayatollah Khamenei explained in a speech the state’s theory of how the riots had unfolded: ‘one group of individuals carefully selected, identified, and trained abroad. Others, malicious elements and criminals. And others, naive teenagers: “These are the foot soldiers. Their mission is to go and attack a place, like a police station, a house, an office, a bank, an industrial center, an electricity facility. That is their mission. The ringleaders gather in groups of 10, 20, or 50 people each, guide them, and tell them: You must go here, do this, and commit crimes, and they do.”’
The final Iranian government tally of those killed in the insurgency was over 3,000. AryJeay estimates ⅔ of these were pro-government security forces and civilians, and ⅓ were rioters. This is higher than the 1,000+ Iranians killed in the 12-day war with Israel and the US in 2025.
What was this? A military analysis
The US and Israel were open about Mossad’s support for the rioters and for their goal, the destruction of the Iranian state. Mike Pompeo tweeted “happy new year to the protesters and to Mossad walking beside them.” Mossad told protesters “we are with you, in the field.” Trump posted to protesters that help was on the way, and as the riots unfolded – attacking groceries, emergency responders, government buildings, mosques, and random people on the street to sow insecurity and terror – a US armada approached Iran. As that armada approached, the US-backed regime in Syria made a final push in the Northeast to reach the Iraq border, releasing thousands of Islamic State prisoners.
The riots may have been envisioned to have achieved more than they did – and they might have done, had the state not shut down the internet and starlink – causing the state to approach collapse just in time for a US invasion to finish Iran off.
The state didn’t collapse, but the war may be coming regardless.
(Substack)
From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.
By: Prince Kapone – January 28, 2026
Reuters sells custodial plunder as a pricing issue, turning blockade into “market caution.” We restore the missing record: seizures, supervision, and the re-routing of Venezuelan oil revenue through imperial hands. We reframe the contradiction as doctrine—Fortress America tightening hemispheric command as multipolar escape routes multiply. We close with a call to organize: break the information blockade, target the choke points, and build material solidarity with the besieged.
How a Struggle Over Power Gets Rewritten as a “Market Update”
The article under excavation is Chen Aizhu’s Reuters report, “Exclusive: PetroChina holds off from buying Venezuelan oil marketed under U.S. control, sources say” (Jan. 27, 2026). In basic reporting terms, Reuters claims PetroChina has instructed its trading desks to avoid Venezuelan crude after Washington “took control” of Venezuela’s oil exports, and it frames the decision as a mix of sanctions-risk, pricing dynamics, and uncertainty over how any remaining China–Venezuela “oil-for-debt” flows might be reallocated under the new U.S.-supervised marketing channels. The piece points to Vitol and Trafigura as intermediaries moving Venezuelan barrels toward U.S. and European refiners, notes narrowing discounts for Merey heavy crude, and concludes that Venezuelan supply into China will stay tight as buyers shift toward alternative grades. This is the story Reuters wants to naturalize: coerced re-routing presented as market adjustment, and geopolitical seizure translated into a trader’s problem.
Reuters tells this story like it’s giving a shipping forecast, not describing a clash over who controls a nation’s lifeline. In “PetroChina holds off from buying Venezuelan oil marketed under U.S. control,” the drama of power is quietly repackaged as a matter of spreads, discounts, and supply flows. The language is calm, technical, almost soothing — as if the only thing at stake is whether a refinery can shave a few dollars off a barrel. What disappears in that calm tone is the fact that we are not reading about weather patterns in the North Sea. We are reading about control — and who gets to decide where a country’s oil goes.
Look at the grammar. PetroChina “holds off.” Traders are “told not to touch.” Supply will “remain tight.” Buyers will be “nudged” toward alternatives. Nobody seizes, nobody compels, nobody imposes. Power has no verbs. It shows up only as a background condition, like humidity. The phrase “marketed under U.S. control” slips by as if it were a routine customs arrangement, not a sentence that should make any reader sit upright. Control is presented as administrative, procedural, technical — the kind of thing handled by paperwork, not politics. The question of how that control came to be is simply outside the story’s universe.
Instead, the market becomes the hero of the narrative. Prices “narrow.” Offers are “uncompetitive.” Cargoes “flow.” Refiners “approach.” The world is reduced to a choreography of barrels moving across oceans in search of the best margin. When politics appears, it appears only as “uncertainty” — a nuisance variable that traders must price in. This is a familiar move in business reporting: treat power as risk, treat domination as disruption, treat coercion as a complication to otherwise normal commerce. The effect is not neutrality. It is a way of teaching the reader what not to see.
Agency is carefully relocated downward. Anonymous “trading executives” and “sources” explain what is happening, while the actors shaping the terrain remain unnamed, abstract, almost atmospheric. Decisions are framed as responses to market signals, not to structures of force. It’s as if the traders woke up one morning, looked at a price screen, and said, “Well, that’s that,” rather than operating in a world where access, legality, and permission are politically defined. By the time the reader reaches the end of the piece, the story feels like a lesson in commodity logistics, not a window into a struggle over sovereignty.
The technocratic tone does the rest of the ideological work. Talk of discounts to Brent, delivery months, and refinery preferences creates distance — emotional, political, human distance. It narrows the field of vision until only the commercial surface remains. When everything is translated into price language, moral language quietly exits the building. No one asks what it means for a country’s main export to be “under” someone else’s control. No one asks who benefits from that arrangement or who pays the cost. The only tragedy visible in this frame is an unfavorable spread.
And then there is the sourcing. Anonymous market voices are treated as natural authorities, as if the trading desk were the neutral center of the universe. Other perspectives — ones that would name this as a political rupture rather than a pricing issue — are simply not invited into the text. The story is engineered for circulation among analysts and investors. It is designed to be clipped into briefings and forwarded along email chains as a tidy explanation: PetroChina pauses, Western traders step in, prices adjust. Clean, efficient, bloodless.
This is how normalization works. An extraordinary shift in control over a nation’s resource stream is narrated as routine commercial adaptation. What should sound like a confrontation is written like a procurement memo. Power is naturalized; markets are personified; politics is downgraded to background noise. The reader is left with the impression that events are being sorted out by the invisible hand, when in fact very visible hands have rearranged the table.
So before we argue about what this situation means, we have to be clear about what this article does. It performs a translation. It takes a struggle over authority and rewrites it as a story about arbitrage. It takes questions of sovereignty and dissolves them into talk of competitiveness. That translation is not accidental. It is the text’s central achievement. And once you see that move, you can’t unsee it: the calm voice of the market report is doing ideological labor, turning a matter of power into a matter of price.
What the Market Story Leaves Out of the Frame
Reuters tells the story like a trader’s morning brief: PetroChina steps back, Vitol and Trafigura step in, barrels move, discounts shift, risk is assessed. Washington, we are told, has redirected Venezuelan oil exports, placed a large share of those barrels under U.S. control, and arranged for sales proceeds to flow into a U.S.-supervised fund. Some cargoes have already landed with refiners like Valero, Phillips 66, and Repsol, while traders shop others around India and China. In this telling, the drama of a nation’s primary resource is reduced to a change of middlemen and a question of who is willing to sign the paperwork.
PetroChina’s hesitation is explained with the cool logic of the spreadsheet. Risk on one side, price on the other. Reuters cites traders who say the discount on Venezuela’s heavy Merey crude into China has narrowed, making it less attractive against Canadian barrels or sanctioned flows from Iran and Russia. There is also concern, we are told, about how rerouted cargoes might tangle with China’s long-standing debt-for-oil arrangements with Caracas. And, the reader is gently reminded, Venezuelan crude is only a small share of China’s overall imports anyway, much of it historically handled by independent “teapot” refiners. Case closed: just another portfolio adjustment in the grand bazaar of global oil.
But step out of this narrow hallway of trader chatter and a very different landscape comes into view. China’s Foreign Ministry has publicly stated that the U.S. seizure of Venezuela’s president and use of force against Caracas “clearly violate international law, basic norms in international relations, and the purposes and principles of the UN Charter” and called for Maduro’s release and dialogue; the ministry has also condemned “hegemonic acts” by the United States that “seriously violate international law and Venezuela’s sovereignty and threaten peace and security in Latin America and the Caribbean.” Chinese officials have stressed that cooperation between China and Venezuela is cooperation between sovereign states protected by international law and the domestic laws of both countries, and that the use of force and unilateral coercive measures against Venezuela’s oil industry have undermined economic and social order. None of that appears in the Reuters frame, where the only “problem” is whether a barrel clears at the right discount.
Chinese officials have also characterized long-running U.S. sanctions as illegal unilateral measures and tied Washington’s latest escalations—like the blockade posture around Venezuelan oil flows—to wider shocks in normal international trade and regional stability. This shifts the terrain entirely. What Reuters treats as market “uncertainty” is, from Beijing’s standpoint, the result of deliberate political pressure that has reshaped the ground on which trade takes place. PetroChina’s pause, in this light, is not just caution in a volatile market; it is navigation through a field altered by coercive power. Yet in the Reuters version, this structural upheaval is translated into the soft, anesthetizing language of “assessment,” as if the storm were just bad weather rather than a man-made squall.
Equally missing is how “U.S. control” over Venezuelan oil is said to work in practice. Chinese financial reporting has described U.S. officials outlining arrangements in which Venezuelan oil sales are supervised and revenues placed into accounts under U.S. control. Other reporting has referred to executive actions establishing legal and administrative custody structures over Venezuelan oil income held in the United States. This is not simply about where ships sail; it is about who grips the cash register once the oil is sold. By the time crude reaches a refinery, the decisive struggle may already have occurred at the level of financial command. That dimension—who holds the money, who releases it, under what conditions—is central to understanding what “control” means, yet it is smoothed over in the Reuters narrative.
Statements attributed to U.S. leadership have circulated in international reporting as well, including remarks about the United States effectively taking possession of tens of millions of barrels of Venezuelan oil. Whether dressed up as leverage, compensation, or strategic necessity, such talk places the issue squarely at the level of state power and resource capture. But the Reuters article does not invite the reader to see it that way. Instead, Western trading houses stepping into Venezuelan flows are presented as a normal commercial development, as if the only change were a new management team rather than a shift in who commands a nation’s lifeblood.
From the regional side, the language is far sharper than anything allowed into the market frame. The Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA-TCP) has condemned what it calls illegal military aggression and demanded the release of Venezuela’s President, Nicolas Maduro, describing his kidnapping as a grave violation of international law and a threat to regional peace. Venezuelan official communiqués have similarly spoken of attacks on national territory and infrastructure. Whatever one’s view of every claim, these positions show that key actors in the region understand the moment as a political and military confrontation, not a routine reshuffling of supply routes. That understanding disappears once the story is filtered through the safe grammar of commodity trading.
Civil society and legal voices across the Global South have also weighed in, condemning unilateral military action and warning about the destabilizing precedents such actions set for international law. Their interventions place the episode within a longer history of external interference in Latin America, where economic pressure and force have often marched together. Yet these perspectives do not enter the Reuters field of vision, which remains fixed on traders, refiners, and pricing formulas. Reality is narrowed until the legal and political stakes are pushed offstage and the market mechanics take the spotlight.
Inside Venezuela, regional reporting has focused on how oil revenues under current conditions are being handled domestically, including announcements of funds directed toward workers’ incomes and social programs and the creation of bodies tasked with defending the country’s economic rights internationally. Whatever the precise numbers, this layer of the story makes clear that Venezuelan authorities are treating the situation as one of national survival and reconstruction, not a minor fluctuation in export margins. None of this social and institutional response is legible in the Reuters account, where the only visible actors are companies, cargoes, and the invisible hand that somehow always seems to wear a naval glove.
Finally, there is the maritime dimension. Spanish-language reporting has described tanker interceptions and seizures that Venezuelan officials have characterized as acts of “international piracy”. Whether one adopts that term or not, the reporting indicates that shipping routes themselves have become sites of enforcement and confrontation. The sea is not a neutral highway but a contested space where interdiction, compliance risk, and the threat of asset seizure shape what moves and what does not. Yet in the Reuters narrative, the ocean appears calm and commercial, as if barrels drifted to market on the gentle currents of supply and demand alone.
Taken together, these omitted layers—official Chinese condemnations, revenue control mechanisms, regional denunciations, Global South legal concerns, domestic Venezuelan responses, and maritime enforcement—compose a record that looks nothing like a routine market adjustment. They point instead to a struggle over authority, legality, and control of resource flows. Reuters does not so much falsify this reality as flatten it, translating a multi-dimensional confrontation into one safe dialect: the language of price. Next we will analyze what that flattening means. For now, it is enough to see how much had to be pushed out of frame to make the story look “normal.”
Former Manager of PDVSA: Trump’s Oil Viceroyalty Over Venezuela Is Fantasy (Interview)
Community or Command: How Siege Replaces Sovereignty in the American Pole
Once the omitted record is restored, the Reuters story collapses under its own narrowness. What is presented as a pricing problem is in fact a doctrine being enforced. The question is not whether Venezuelan crude clears at an attractive discount. The question is who commands its movement, who supervises its revenue, and who decides which nations are permitted to touch it at all. Prices are the surface signal. Authority is the substance underneath.
This is where the hemispheric contradiction comes into focus. Latin America and the Caribbean now sit between two incompatible logics of world order. One treats the region as a political subject capable of diversifying partners, widening development options, and acting collectively in a multipolar transition. The other treats the hemisphere as managed space — a strategic rear base where sovereignty is tolerated only when it remains harmless. Under that second logic, instability is not social breakdown; it is disobedience. And security is not protection; it is enforcement.
What we are witnessing around Venezuelan oil is that enforcement made material. Control here does not mean ownership in a formal sense. It means custody over circulation — authority over where oil flows, how it is sold, and through which financial channels its value is realized. That is why revenue supervision matters as much as tanker routes. When the flow of income from a country’s primary resource passes through externally administered channels, sovereignty is hollowed out without a single flag being lowered. The state continues to exist, but its lifeblood moves under someone else’s supervision.
This is not collapse. It is administration. Earlier imperial playbooks sought regime change — the dramatic replacement of governments. That approach proved unstable. What replaces it is regime subordination: local authorities remain in place, but within a narrowing corridor defined by external power. Leaders are not treated as sovereign decision-makers; they are treated as managers of a pressured system, tasked with maintaining domestic order while strategic decisions about resources, trade, and alignment are made elsewhere. Sovereignty becomes conditional — revocable when it obstructs hemispheric control.
Oil becomes the ideal lever in this system not because it is scarce, but because it is infrastructural. Its movement depends on insurers, shipping registries, ports, refineries, and financial clearing systems — arenas where imperial power still dominates. By turning access to those systems into a permission structure, empire converts economic life into a behavioral mechanism. Exports flow when compliant. They constrict when defiant. Development itself becomes conditional, granted or withdrawn through logistical choke points rather than tanks.
This is the evolution from persuasion to siege. Hyper-imperial power has learned that occupation is expensive and politically corrosive. Blockade, by contrast, is sustainable. It disciplines without administering. It punishes without rebuilding. It tightens gradually, through seizures, insurance denials, port restrictions, and financial custody mechanisms that appear technical but function as strangulation. No single act looks like invasion, yet the cumulative effect is the same: a society forced to negotiate its survival under permanent external pressure.
Law, in this phase, does not disappear — it inverts. International law ceases to restrain power and becomes irrelevant background noise, while domestic imperial law trails behind force as paperwork. The question asked in the imperial center is not whether an act violates global norms, but whether internal procedures were followed after the fact. Legality becomes administrative, not ethical. The world is treated as an extension of imperial jurisdiction, where force is justified by indictment rather than treaty.
Seen from this angle, the Venezuelan case is not an anomaly but a prototype. It demonstrates how the American Pole consolidates itself under conditions of global decline: not by expanding outward, but by tightening control inward. The hemisphere becomes a fortified zone where rival influence is denied, resource flows are supervised, and sovereignty is reduced to a compliance status. What appears in the Reuters narrative as a market adjustment is, in fact, the visible edge of this consolidation.
And this is why the story must be told in structural, not commercial, terms. The struggle is not over discounts. It is over whether Latin America and the Caribbean will be treated as community — actors in a multipolar world — or as command territory, managed through siege and supervision. The barrel is not just a barrel. It is a lever in a system where circulation equals control. What is being enforced is not a trade preference. It is a doctrine: sovereignty by permission, development by approval, and survival by alignment.
Break the Siege Where You Stand
Reuters wants you to treat this as a “trading decision” inside the clean, air-conditioned world of “marketed under U.S. control.” But once you accept that phrase, you’ve already swallowed the empire’s premise: that Washington can kidnap a country’s presidency, patrol its sea lanes, reroute its crude, and then call it “control” the way a bank calls a foreclosure “property management.” If that language stands, everything stands. The seizure becomes paperwork. The blockade becomes “market conditions.” Piracy becomes “compliance.” And the working class—here and abroad—gets trained to watch theft like it’s a weather report.
So Part IV is simple: if this is a system of coercion, then resistance has to be organized at the points where coercion becomes real. Not in the abstract. Not in hashtags alone. At the chokepoints: ports, banks, refineries, shipping insurance, logistics contracts, newsroom storylines, and political offices that sign off on “sanctions enforcement” while pleading poverty at home. The good news is: people are already moving. You don’t have to invent solidarity out of thin air—you have to join it, sharpen it, and bring it into the workplaces and institutions where the empire actually functions.
On the anti-war front, coordinated action is already being called for. Veterans For Peace helped circulate a clear anti-imperialist statement condemning U.S. attacks on Venezuela and demanding respect for sovereignty. Alliance for Global Justice has promoted “days of anti-war actions” and labor-linked solidarity messaging, including statements from trade union leadership defending Latin America as a “territory of peace.” And international solidarity is not theoretical—people across regions have already mobilized publicly against the abduction-and-blockade escalation, as reported by outlets rooted in movement politics such as Workers World and in the Global South–aligned analysis ecosystem like Tricontinental, which has tracked demonstrations and statements across Asia and the Pacific.
That’s one lane: streets, embassies, political pressure. But if we’re serious, we have to widen the front into material interruption—because the empire doesn’t run on opinion, it runs on throughput. Ports matter because seizures become real only when cargo is handled, tankers are serviced, and refined products are processed without friction. Labor has historic precedent for refusing complicity in imperial supply chains. You can see the pattern in recent dockworker solidarity actions internationally documented by labor networks (even when focused on other fronts): when workers treat the port as a political site, “foreign policy” stops being a distant spectacle and becomes a domestic contradiction inside the workplace. The lesson transfers: if Venezuelan crude is being “redirected,” then the question for workers in logistics, shipping, and refining is whether they will be turned into the empire’s hands—loading, servicing, and normalizing what is, in substance, coerced transfer.
So the call here is not romantic. It’s practical. If you are in organized labor—or you have ties to it—push for internal education and resolutions against sanctions and maritime coercion; link up with anti-war coalitions already doing public work; and treat “sanctions enforcement” as a workers’ issue because it is. If you’re in communities shaped by austerity, make the connection plain: the same state that claims the right to hold another people’s oil revenue in “supervised” funds will tell you there’s no money for clinics, schools, housing, transit, or disaster preparedness. Empire abroad is austerity at home with a different costume.
There is also a legal battlefield—but not the fantasy one where empire politely restrains itself. The point is to raise the cost and delegitimize the architecture: to force public confrontation with the fact that kidnapping a head of state and seizing resource flows has “no justification in international law,” even by establishment legal standards. That matters because it creates fractures inside the imperial coalition and gives movements more leverage when they organize domestically. Even institutions like Chatham House have publicly stated the abduction has no legal justification—use that contradiction as a wedge: if even the empire’s respectable law programs can’t launder it, why should workers and communities accept it as normal?
And finally: the information front. Reuters is not “misinformed.” It is doing its job—manufacturing the emotional climate in which plunder feels administrative. Our job is counter-production: build a people’s account of what’s happening that names coercion plainly and refuses the grammar of empire. Share and circulate reporting and statements from solidarity organizations; amplify Global South perspectives; translate, annotate, and distribute. If the enemy can say “U.S. control” with a straight face, then we have to make “sovereignty” sound like a living demand again—not a museum word. The fight is to make working people recognize the pattern: custodianship is colonialism with a spreadsheet.
So: join the formations already in motion. Plug into the anti-war actions. Build workplace education where logistics and energy workers can see their own hands in the machine. Pressure elected officials where it counts—sanctions authorities, enforcement budgets, port and shipping governance, refinery contracting. And turn solidarity into relationship: direct links to Venezuelan popular organizations, unions, and community structures through credible solidarity networks, not through NGO theater. Because the only thing that breaks a siege is organized force from below—force that refuses to be recruited into the empire’s supply chain and refuses to let theft be renamed “market order.”
From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.
This article by Arturo Sánchez Jiménez originally appeared in the January 28, 2026 edition of La Jornada, Mexico’s premier left wing daily newspaper.
Mexico City. At the José Martí Cultural Center, the diplomat emphasized that even the shipment of fuel and food to Cuba is currently being “criminalized.” “Who could possibly think it’s a crime for a ship to enter Cuba with food, with fuel that we use for lighting, cooking, and transportation?” she asked, arguing that the U.S. measures aim to prevent any basic commercial activity on the island.
The United States “persecutes anyone who might help Cubans,” stated Johana Tablada, deputy chief of mission at the Cuban embassy in Mexico, on Wednesday, denouncing the tightening of the blockade and new actions that, she said, seek to suffocate the island. At a ceremony commemorating the 173rd anniversary of José Martí’s birth, Tablada, speaking on behalf of Ambassador Eugenio Martínez—who was unable to attend due to unforeseen circumstances—asserted that the Cuban people will follow the example of their national hero in defending the island’s right to choose its own destiny.
Tablada asserted that the economic, commercial, and financial blockade imposed by the United States not only remains in place but has intensified in recent years, directly impacting the daily lives of Cuban families. He stated that Washington “is doing everything necessary to impoverish Cuba, destabilize it, and regain its dominance,” while simultaneously persecuting third countries, banks, and companies that attempt to maintain normal relations with the island.

The diplomatic representative linked this policy to a long history of aggression against Cuban sovereignty, from the imposition of the Guantanamo naval base to the current unilateral coercive measures. She affirmed that, in the face of this scenario, the figure of José Martí continues to be a source of inspiration for resistance. “Martí gives us strength to resist and overcome today, in the midst of the greatest adversity,” she said, highlighting his anti-imperialist thought and his defense of the dignity of the peoples of the Americas.
In her speech, Tablada also explicitly thanked Mexico for its historic stance against the blockade. She acknowledged the Mexican government’s constant support in international forums and the solidarity of the Mexican people with Cuba. “We are very grateful to Mexico for its unwavering support and its constant calls to end the abuse that the blockade represents against the Cuban people,” he said.
She maintained that Cuba will continue to pursue a “civilized and respectful” relationship with the United States, but without relinquishing its sovereignty. “Do not mistreat us, and we will not mistreat you. Respect us, and we will respect you,” he said, quoting Martí.
-
Cuban Embassy Denounces US Blockade Tightening & Persecution of Those Who Help
January 29, 2026
Johana Tablada asserted that the Cuban people will follow the example of their national hero in defending the island’s right to choose its own destiny.
-
Mexico’s Supreme Court Will Incorporate Legal Knowledge of Indigenous & Afro-Mexican Peoples
January 29, 2026January 29, 2026
“[Justice] must get closer to reality, and to get closer to reality we need method, we need knowledge, we need systematization, we need the people who demand justice, who cry out for justice, who mobilize out there.”
-
People’s Mañanera January 29
January 29, 2026
President Sheinbaum’s daily press conference, with comments on Donald Trump phonecall, relations with Canada, revising the story of Ryan Wedding’s “arrest”, Sinaloa security, and Interoceanic train derailment.
The post Cuban Embassy Denounces US Blockade Tightening & Persecution of Those Who Help appeared first on Mexico Solidarity Media.
From Mexico Solidarity Media via This RSS Feed.
This article by Ivan Evair Saldaña originally appeared in the January 29, 2026 edition of La Jornada, Mexico’s premier left wing daily newspaper.
Mexico City. The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SCJN) created the Community Research System (SIC), a mechanism that seeks to incorporate the legal knowledge of indigenous and Afro-Mexican peoples—derived from their history, practices and defense of human rights—into the drafting of resolutions by judges, magistrates and ministers of the country.
The SIC, which is part of the Center for Constitutional Studies and Legal Knowledge (CECSJ) of the high court, expands the traditional vision of law, makes legal pluralism a reality and allows this knowledge to become part of its national history, said Supreme Court President Hugo Aguilar Ortiz during the presentation ceremony of the system.
“I am convinced that justice must abandon formality. I say it won’t be abandoned entirely, but it must get closer to reality, and to get closer to reality we need method, we need knowledge, we need systematization, we need the people who demand justice, who cry out for justice, who mobilize out there, to systematize their arguments and bring them to us. And for that, research is required, applied research,” criticized the representative of the Federal Judiciary (PJF).

Supreme Court President, Hugo Aguilar Ortiz
He also emphasized that the goal is to transform the justice system through applied research that directly impacts sentences and conflict resolution, overcoming views that have historically minimized community knowledge.
“You could say that outside, in the Western world, art is produced, but if we see something in rural communities, it’s called crafts, it has less value. If it’s a rule established by the State, it’s law; but if the community produces it, it’s custom and tradition. If we see a priest performing his ritual, well, he’s a priest, but if we see our village elder perform a cleansing, a ritual, well, he’s a witch doctor. If someone tells a story, well, it’s not documented, it’s part of oral tradition, it’s a myth, but if a scholar tells it, it’s history. Anything that Indigenous people produce, anything that our very being produces; you can stand up and say, well, he’s Indigenous, he doesn’t know, he doesn’t have the capacity,” he emphasized.
Orlando Aragón Andrade, director general of the CECSJ, pointed out that, given the plurality of justice and legal systems, it is necessary to build bridges of dialogue to move toward a more democratic society and a more inclusive court. In turn, Iván Ramos Méndez, representing the head of the INPI, Adelfo Regino Montes, stated that following the 2024 constitutional reform, there are more than 16,000 normative systems in force in Mexico.
Also participating in the presentation were Catalina Ramírez Hernández, from the Judicial Administration Body; Palmira Flores García, an indigenous community researcher from San Luis Potosí; and Sael Silva Cisneros, an Afro-Mexican community researcher from Guerrero.
-
Mexico’s Supreme Court Will Incorporate Legal Knowledge of Indigenous & Afro-Mexican Peoples
January 29, 2026January 29, 2026
“[Justice] must get closer to reality, and to get closer to reality we need method, we need knowledge, we need systematization, we need the people who demand justice, who cry out for justice, who mobilize out there.”
-
People’s Mañanera January 29
January 29, 2026
President Sheinbaum’s daily press conference, with comments on Donald Trump phonecall, relations with Canada, revising the story of Ryan Wedding’s “arrest”, Sinaloa security, and Interoceanic train derailment.
-
Mexico’s Ex-President Felipe Calderón Called a “murderer” in France
January 29, 2026January 29, 2026
Calderón’s specious drug war produced 120,000 homicides during his reign, representing an 140% increase compared to the previous presidential term.
The post Mexico’s Supreme Court Will Incorporate Legal Knowledge of Indigenous & Afro-Mexican Peoples appeared first on Mexico Solidarity Media.
From Mexico Solidarity Media via This RSS Feed.
Every day, President Claudia Sheinbaum gives a morning presidential press conference and Mexico Solidarity Media posts English language summaries, translated by Mexico Solidarity’s Pedro Gellert Frank. Previous press conference summaries are available here.
Direct Dialogue with US: Cooperation Without Subordination
President Claudia Sheinbaum held a 40-minute call with Donald Trump. They agreed to continue cooperation on trade and security. Trump acknowledged Mexico’s progress and proposed expanding rules of origin. Mexico defended the trilateral trade agreement.
Sheinbaum read Trump’s Truth Social message, where he described the conversation as “very productive” and positive for both countries.
Relations with Canada and Sovereign Decisions
Sheinbaum recalled Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s visit, emphasizing that cooperation includes strategic infrastructure such as ports. The issue of rare earths was not a topic of the call but remains in the dialogue with Minister of Economy Marcelo Ebrard; any decision will be sovereign.
Arrest of Ryan Wedding Didn’t Involve Foreign Agents
In response to reports of FBI intervention, the President clarified that, upon reading the full Wall Street Journal article, it is in line with what was reported, namely that the arrest was carried out in an operation involving Mexican security cabinet agencies. Mexico will not allow foreign agents to intervene within its territory.
Sinaloa: Coordination and Progress
The Federal Government is working with the Sinaloa state government. Arrests have already been made. The Ministry of the Interior maintains communication with the injured Citizen Movement local legislators Sergio Torres Félix and Elizabeth Montoya Ojeda. Advances in security were reported, and a presidential visit was announced for the coming days.
Historical Memory: The Presidential Administration of Violence
Following the accusations leveled against former president Felipe Calderón at Sciences Po, Sheinbaum said the charges are “self-explanatory.” She recalled that his government left thousands of victims in the wake of the war on drugs, “collateral damage,” and the worst period of kidnappings, plus collusion with organized crime, as evidenced by his Minister of Security, Genaro García Luna, who is currently in prison.
She emphasized that discussing that period is key so young people know of the history before voting.
Interoceanic Train: Report with Scientific Evidence
The first report is based on technical evidence, namely, data from the “black box” and intensive track reviews. The preliminary cause was excess speed. People should trust the Attorney General’s Office report, which is underpinned by simulations and technical analysis.
-
Mexico’s Supreme Court Will Incorporate Legal Knowledge of Indigenous & Afro-Mexican Peoples
January 29, 2026January 29, 2026
“[Justice] must get closer to reality, and to get closer to reality we need method, we need knowledge, we need systematization, we need the people who demand justice, who cry out for justice, who mobilize out there.”
-
People’s Mañanera January 29
January 29, 2026
President Sheinbaum’s daily press conference, with comments on Donald Trump phonecall, relations with Canada, revising the story of Ryan Wedding’s “arrest”, Sinaloa security, and Interoceanic train derailment.
-
Mexico’s Ex-President Felipe Calderón Called a “murderer” in France
January 29, 2026January 29, 2026
Calderón’s specious drug war produced 120,000 homicides during his reign, representing an 140% increase compared to the previous presidential term.
The post People’s Mañanera January 29 appeared first on Mexico Solidarity Media.
From Mexico Solidarity Media via This RSS Feed.
This article by Irving Sanchez originally appeared in the January 29, 2026 edition of Sin Línea.
Former Mexican President Felipe Calderón Hinojosa was confronted by students during an academic talk at the Paris Institute of Political Studies, one of Europe ‘s most prestigious universities . The incident was captured on video and widely shared on social media, generating reactions and reigniting the controversy surrounding his presidential legacy.
It all happened when he attended as a speaker on a panel entitled Wanted: A UN Secretary-General for a Broken World, focused on the global challenges of international governance; however, his speech was interrupted when a group of young people stood up from the auditorium to chant slogans against him, which caused tension among the attendees.
In response to the protest, the event moderator intervened to remind everyone that the institute is a pluralistic space where the free expression of ideas is permitted, even those that may be uncomfortable for the guests. During the incident, Felipe Calderón Hinojosa remained silent, with a serious expression, without directly responding to the accusations and allowing the event to continue after the interruption.
The confrontation in Paris was directly linked to decisions made during Felipe Calderón ‘s presidency, particularly the security strategy he initiated in December 2006 with the deployment of armed forces to combat organized crime. This policy marked the beginning of a period of violence that profoundly transformed the security landscape in Mexico.

Various official reports indicate that during his administration there was a significant increase in intentional homicides. The most critical point was reached in 2011, when more than 27,000 murders were reported , with a rate exceeding 24 homicides per 100,000 inhabitants. Overall, the cumulative figures for his six-year term exceeded 120,000 homicides, representing an increase of approximately 140 percent compared to the previous presidential term.
This incident in France adds to other similar situations Felipe Calderón Hinojosa has faced abroad. In December 2024, during a forum in Madrid, Spain, he was confronted by a woman from Ciudad Juárez who blamed him for the violence unleashed during his administration, an incident that was also documented and shared on social media.
Following the release of the video of the incident in Paris , the conversation moved to social media , where numerous users reacted with criticism and derogatory comments towards the former president.
-
Mexico’s Supreme Court Will Incorporate Legal Knowledge of Indigenous & Afro-Mexican Peoples
January 29, 2026January 29, 2026
“[Justice] must get closer to reality, and to get closer to reality we need method, we need knowledge, we need systematization, we need the people who demand justice, who cry out for justice, who mobilize out there.”
-
People’s Mañanera January 29
January 29, 2026
President Sheinbaum’s daily press conference, with comments on Donald Trump phonecall, relations with Canada, revising the story of Ryan Wedding’s “arrest”, Sinaloa security, and Interoceanic train derailment.
-
Mexico’s Ex-President Felipe Calderón Called a “murderer” in France
January 29, 2026January 29, 2026
Calderón’s specious drug war produced 120,000 homicides during his reign, representing an 140% increase compared to the previous presidential term.
The post Mexico’s Ex-President Felipe Calderón Called a “murderer” in France appeared first on Mexico Solidarity Media.
From Mexico Solidarity Media via This RSS Feed.
This article by María del Pilar Martínez originally appeared in the January 28, 2026 edition of El Economista.
The Ministry of Labor and Social Welfare (STPS) announced on January 28, 2026, the activation of an institutional support mechanism following the bankruptcy of First Brands in the United States. This financial situation has directly impacted maquiladora companies located in northern Mexico, including plants such as BPI Brake Manufacturing Juárez, Autolite, and Tridonex.
The impact is reflected in the closure of seven plants and staff reductions affecting more than 4,000 workers nationwide. The federal agency, in coordination with local authorities, has begun monitoring cases according to each industry’s jurisdiction to ensure compliance with current labor laws.

The founder of First Brands has been indicted by federal prosecutors for allegedly defrauding lenders out of billions of dollars before the auto parts supplier collapsed into bankruptcy. Patrick James, who was also First Brands’ chief executive, was charged in a nine-count indictment made public on Thursday with running a continuing financial crimes enterprise, bank fraud, wire fraud and money laundering conspiracy.
The assistance operation integrates the powers of the Federal Attorney’s Office for Labor Defense ( Profedet ) and the Federal Center for Conciliation and Labor Registration (CFCRL) .
“The main objective of this intervention is to provide free legal advice and activate conciliation processes that ensure the payment of wages, benefits, compensation and respect for the social security rights of workers of companies such as BPI Brake Manufacturing Juárez, Autolite and Tridonex,” the agency explained.
The Mexican government indicated that these actions seek to offer legal solutions that guarantee labor justice after the declaration of insolvency of the foreign parent company.
To assist those affected, direct communication channels have been established through the Profedet hotline 079 and the CFCRL phone number 55 88 74 86 00. These contact points offer free specialized guidance to employees who need to initiate legal or institutional procedures.
The STPS reiterated that it will maintain oversight of the process to safeguard labor rights in the face of any situation that compromises the well-being of workers in the federal entities where First Brands subsidiaries operated.
-
Mexico’s Supreme Court Will Incorporate Legal Knowledge of Indigenous & Afro-Mexican Peoples
January 29, 2026January 29, 2026
“[Justice] must get closer to reality, and to get closer to reality we need method, we need knowledge, we need systematization, we need the people who demand justice, who cry out for justice, who mobilize out there.”
-
People’s Mañanera January 29
January 29, 2026
President Sheinbaum’s daily press conference, with comments on Donald Trump phonecall, relations with Canada, revising the story of Ryan Wedding’s “arrest”, Sinaloa security, and Interoceanic train derailment.
-
Mexico’s Ex-President Felipe Calderón Called a “murderer” in France
January 29, 2026January 29, 2026
Calderón’s specious drug war produced 120,000 homicides during his reign, representing an 140% increase compared to the previous presidential term.
The post Mexico’s Labour & Social Welfare Secretariat Will Protect Workers From First Brands Bankruptcy appeared first on Mexico Solidarity Media.
From Mexico Solidarity Media via This RSS Feed.
Venezuela’s Foreign Minister, Yván Gil, referred to the process of the forced sale of CITGO Petroleum Corp. as one of the most outrageous acts of “theft, criminality, and judicial piracy in modern history.”
The foreign minister made this assertion on the occasion of the seventh anniversary of the start of the illegal US unilateral coercive measures (euphemistically referred to as “sanctions”) against Venezuela’s oil industry.
In a post on his Telegram channel, FM Gil stated the following: “On January 28, 2019, one of the most outrageous acts of theft, criminality, and judicial piracy in modern history began: the government of the United States imposed an oil embargo on Venezuela with the aim of suffocating its economy and initiated a web of sanctions and a judicial system at the service of corporate interests to seize CITGO, the largest Venezuelan asset abroad.”
Gil emphasized that the US expropriation of CITGO is the result of betrayal by Venezuela’s far right, which called for sanctions against the country. “The illegal sale of CITGO is now in its final stage due to the betrayal of an extremist sector of the Venezuelan opposition, which called for economic strangulation and the theft of CITGO and of everything that by sovereignty, belongs to the Venezuelan people.”
On December 2, 2025, Venezuela repudiated the forced sale of CITGO by the United States. Delcy Rodríguez, who at the time was executive vice president, asserted that the illegal measure was carried out “in collusion with extremist Venezuelan sectors.”
(Últimas Noticias) by Carlos Eduardo Sánchez
Translation: Orinoco Tibune
OT/CB/SL
From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.
A protester who denounced the January 3 US attack on Venezuela was sent to jail. The words were spoken directly to Marco Rubio during a Senate hearing with the US Secretary of State.
“Bombings, killings. That is a war crime,” said a protester during a public appearance of US Secretary of State Marco Rubio this Wednesday, January 28. Rubio was questioned before the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee about the illegal actions carried out by the US against Venezuela on January 3—an operation that included the bombing of populated areas in Caracas, Miranda, La Guaira, and Aragua and the kidnapping of the constitutional president, Nicolás Maduro, and his wife, Cilia Flores.
The protester’s outcry occurred less than a minute after Marco Rubio—widely known for his warlike policy against Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua—began to justify the actions that clearly violated international law.
The middle-aged man held a sign reading “Hands off Venezuela.” Below it appeared the phrase “Code Pink.” This is the name of a “grassroots feminist organization that works to end war and US imperialism, support peace and human rights initiatives, and redirect resources toward health care, education, green jobs, and other programs that promote life,” as they themselves explain on their website.
Faced with the accusations, Rubio showed no sign of feeling addressed and merely pointed with a finger, without turning to look at the protester—a gesture that can be interpreted as a request for the man to be removed from the chamber, which was carried out.
After the protester’s words, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Jim Risch—who had previously celebrated the abduction of President Maduro and Cilia Flores and who had endorsed and praised the US military crimes in Venezuela—said: “Suspended, you know how it is. To jail,” as the man was being removed from the chamber while continuing to condemn the war crime carried out by the US.
Relatives of Civilians Killed in US Caribbean Missile Strikes Sue Trump Administration
(Diario VEA) by Yuleidys Hernández Toledo
Translation: Orinoco Tribune
OT/CB/SL
From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.
By Thierry Deronne – Jan 26, 2026
“Enough of Washington’s orders to Venezuelan politicians. It is Venezuelan politics that will resolve our differences and internal conflicts. We have had enough of dictates from foreign powers. Our republic has already suffered enough from the consequences of fascism and extremism.” These were the words of Delcy Rodríguez, Venezuela’s acting president, to oil workers in the state of Anzoategui, in the east of the country, on January 25.
She announced the creation of a new economic fund specifically designed to improve the income of the Venezuelan working class. Direct instructions to the vice-presidency for the economy aim to raise the necessary funds to strengthen purchasing power and offer improved social protection for workers. This measure will be accompanied by digital innovations. A new technological platform will replace the Patria Platform to ensure that these resources reach beneficiaries effectively and to adjust wage policies and bonuses in favor of workers’ well-being. Trump is seeking to present the fact that he has revived the oil agreements drawn up under Nicolás Maduro’s presidency as a victory, though Trump himself blocked these agreements by imposing multiple sanctions under pressure from the US far right. Delcy Rodríguez explained that the sale of Venezuelan oil will be used primarily to protect workers’ incomes.
This continues the protectionist policies implemented by President Nicolás Maduro–a former union leader–to combat the (over one thousand) sanctions imposed by the US and the US and EU blockade. He is one of the few heads of state who has not succumbed to the siren call of austerity. When he began by periodically increasing wages by 25% or 50%, the private sector offset these increases by raising its prices proportionally. Faced with an inflationary spiral, Maduro decided to reactivate the national productive apparatus through multipolar alliances. This was done not only to reduce dependence on oil revenues but also to replenish state coffers, notably by taxing the wealthiest citizens.
Venezuela’s Central Bank has thus begun to recover valuable resources to intervene in the foreign exchange market and defend the currency. The objective: to rebuild public services and gradually increase workers’ benefits while simultaneously limiting the inflation that is eroding them. A China-style strategy: maintain and strengthen the state as a strategic player in the economy.
As a result, the UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) reports that Venezuela has had the highest growth rate (6.5%) in South America for the past four years. For the first time in 150 years of oil production, the country is close to achieving food sovereignty and produces almost 100% of the food it consumes.
When, in February 2025, Donald Trump revoked Chevron’s license in an attempt to further strangle Venezuela’s economy, President Maduro responded by expanding the market to Asia and handing over the 5,258,000th home built by his administration to a working-class family. On May 1, 2025, he increased the “economic war allowance” from [US] $90 to $120 for 20 million families. An important point when studying purchasing power in Venezuela is that despite Western sanctions, and unlike under neoliberal regimes, public services and basic necessities are very cheap in Venezuela. Subsidized gasoline—the cheapest in the world (US 50 ¢/liter)—water, gas, electricity, internet, subway, etc., are available at low prices. Food distributed monthly by the government to the population in response to the blockade costs only 5% of the market price. Many health centers, as well as public education and culture centers, operate free of charge.
While in the West, a growing number of families struggle to make ends meet, Venezuelan workers flock to the shops and businesses that open daily. Caracas is filled with commercial music, and traffic jams form early in the morning around the giant malls. Thousands of Venezuelan migrants fled the impoverishment they endured in their host countries and returned home on the free, public airline long before the deportations and human rights violations perpetrated by the Trump regime.
Workers mobilized in the streets of Caracas to demand the release of President Maduro and his wife on January 15 and 23, 2026. Photo: Nathan Ramírez.
“The Venezuelan people do not accept any orders from outside,” continued Delcy Rodríguez during the meeting with energy sector officials , members of the legislative branch, and national and foreign business leaders, convened to discuss the public consultation on the partial reform of the Organic Law on Hydrocarbons. “The Venezuelan people have a government, and this government obeys the people. Reciprocity characterizes the relationship between the Venezuelan people, their authorities, and their institutions.”
“We are also not afraid to maintain respectful relations with the United States,” she added, “but these must be based on respect: respect for international law, basic human decency in interpersonal relationships, and respect for the dignity and history of Venezuela. As for the personal threats I receive, I want you to know that I was already aware of them when I took office.”

Caracas: Demonstrators in Caracas demand the liberation of their president, Nicolás Maduro, and his wife, Cilia Flores. Photo: Nathan Ramírez.
From the very first hours following the abduction of President Maduro and his wife, and with no prior knowledge of Venezuela, many left-wing activists became “bots” in the US psychological warfare campaign. The refrain “Delcy betrayed Maduro” was hammered home relentlessly, blindly and with fervor, as if it were an absolute truth. The intensity of the media and online bombardment could have produced doubt, but it seems that by 2026, their capacity to resist these networks and media has eroded even further.
From Caracas, independent journalist Craig Murray dismantled this narrative that the media empires have desperately tried to make us believe: “One narrative which the Western powers are desperate to have you believe is that Acting President Delcy Rodríguez betrayed Maduro and facilitated his capture. That is not what Maduro believes. It is not what his party believes, and I have been unable to find the slightest indication that anybody believes this in Venezuela.
“The security services house journal, the Guardian, published about five articles making this claim, and flagged it as front-page lead and a major scoop. Yet, all of the sources for the Guardian story are still the same US government sources or Machado supporters from the wealthy Miami community of exiled capitalist parasites.
“What is interesting is why the security services wish you to believe that Delcy Rodríguez and her brother Jorge, Speaker of the National Assembly, are agents for the USA. Opposition to US imperialism has defined their entire lives since their father was tortured to death at the behest of the CIA when they were infants. They are both vocal in their continuing support for the Bolivarian Revolution and personally for Maduro. The obvious [US] American motive is to split and weaken the ruling party in Caracas and undermine the government of Venezuela.”

Mobilization of the NUMSA union, in Johannesburg, South Africa, January 24, 2026. Source: NUMSA.
The support of Venezuelan workers, who took to the streets en masse with their organizations to demand the release of Nicolás Maduro and Cilia Flores, is bolstered by that of powerful movements in the Global South. These include the Landless Workers’ Movement (MST), with nearly two million members and highly mobilized in Brazil, and NUMSA, South Africa’s largest trade union, which also demands the release of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores. “Today it’s Venezuela. Tomorrow it will be South Africa,” warned Irvin Jim, general secretary of the National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA), which boasts over 460,000 members. Irvin emphasized the need for an “anti-imperialist front to mobilize workers” beyond partisan and union affiliations: NUMSA “will soon organize a political symposium” to which all progressive political parties in the country will be invited. “It is high time to unite the working class … behind a revolutionary program,” as South Africa faces increasing aggression from the US far right.
In contrast, French Trotskyists brandished a leaflet from the CUTV (Union of Venezuelan Workers) about so-called “union repression” and, without knowing the reality of Venezuela, immediately endorsed it to distance themselves from the demand to free Maduro and maintain a routine anti-imperialism: “We support the Venezuelan people.” The author of the leaflet is Pedro Eusse, a member of the former leadership of the Venezuelan Communist Party, a group of about 15 people who for years have been flooding the world with communiqués about the “neoliberal, fascist dictatorship of Maduro” (sic). This “union” is in fact just a disguise “for the international community,” the typical “local endorsement” that Western leftists need. This manipulation is explained in detail in the article: “Rebirth and Victory of the Venezuelan Communist Party.”
Since the publication of Persian Letters [in 1721], the use of distant countries to settle internal French political scores has been a tradition. This was already the case with the text co-signed in August 2024 by the NPA (New Anticapitalist Party), the Socialist Party, and Clémentine Autain, who together denounced the “Maduro dictatorship.” The statement expressed “particular indignation” at Maduro’s mention of “re-education camps.” In reality, the president had asked of the relevant minister that far-right militants or mercenaries, despite being guilty of destroying public services and assassinating “Black people, therefore Chavistas,” be allowed to learn a trade in prison. Their early release, initiated by President Maduro in December—presented by the media as the “release of political prisoners”—demonstrates the Bolivarian government’s extreme commitment to national unity and reconciliation in its hope that these people, used by Venezuelan oligarchs, will not return to violence and will agree to enter the democratic, electoral field, as the moderate right has done.
Delcy Rodríguez Rejects US ‘Orders’ as Venezuela Advances Hydrocarbons Law Reform
Translated by Orinoco Tribune
OT/SL/JRE
From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.
This article originally appeared in the January 29, 2026 edition of Sin Embargo.
Mexico City. The Mexican Ministry of Foreign Affairs ( SRE ) categorically denied on Wednesday that its consular network in the United States (US) had sought to influence the internal political processes of that country, after President Donald Trump promoted on his social media a new book that warns of an alleged “ invisible coup ” against the US.
In a statement, the Foreign Ministry declared that what has been disseminated in some media outlets are unfounded falsehoods, since the work of Mexico’s consular network in the United States is based on the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and on the respect, commitment and reciprocity established by the 1943 Consular Convention between Mexico and the United States.
“The activities and programs of Mexican consulates are carried out in close coordination with local, state, and federal authorities, always with full respect for U.S. laws and the principle of non-intervention in internal affairs. Therefore, any claim to the contrary is unfounded and untrue,” the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (SRE) wrote, also citing President Claudia Sheinbaum’s foreign policy, based on the principle of non-intervention and full respect for the sovereignty, institutions, and legal processes of each country.
“The activities and programs of Mexican consulates are carried out in close coordination with local, state, and federal authorities, always with full respect for U.S. laws and the principle of non-intervention in internal affairs. Therefore, any claim to the contrary is unfounded and untrue,” the Foreign Ministry added, reaffirming that, according to the principles of the Mexican government, “Mexican consular offices do not promote or participate, directly or indirectly, in demonstrations, protests, or any type of political mobilization within the United States.”
Book Warns of “Coup” Against US
On Wednesday, Donald Trump promoted on his social media the book The Invisible Coup: How American Elites and Foreign Powers Use Immigration as a Weapon, by Peter Schweizer, whose publication accuses the Mexican government of organizing an “invisible coup” against the US by “using mass migration as a political weapon to influence elections and undermine national security.”
“Mexico has 53 consulates in the United States, while the United Kingdom and China have six and seven, respectively. As I argue in the book, consular officials are busy supporting political activities (in the U.S.), trying to influence the presidential elections,” Schweizer stated on CBS News’ Takeout interview program with Major Garrett. “I think it’s inappropriate for the Mexican government and its diplomats to be involved in this type of political activity within the United States.”
In the book, the author points out that former President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) visited US cities in February 2017 to call on Mexican migrants to oppose the anti-immigrant policies promoted by Trump, while in the case of Claudia Sheinbaum, Schweizer said that the President played the song The Migrant Anthem during a press conference.
“And although my birth certificate says American, I am pure Mexican […] We changed places but not flags/I have the green, white and red in my veins,” the song says, according to Schweizer, who even accused Morena Senator Gerardo Fernández Noroña of openly speaking of “reconquering” the United States by referring in the Congress of the Union to California, Texas and New Mexico, among other areas, as “occupied territories.”
-
Mexican Government Rejects Accusations of Interference in US through Consulates
January 29, 2026
On Wednesday, Trump promoted a book that accuses Claudia Sheinbaum’s administration of organizing an “invisible coup” against the United States.
-
People’s Mañanera January 28
January 28, 2026
President Sheinbaum’s daily press conference, with comments on Interoceanic train derailment, electoral reform, SMEs credit, and increased exports.
-
Mexico’s Green Party Has Served Neoliberals, Salinas Pliego & the 4T. Its Franchise Model is in Danger.
January 28, 2026January 28, 2026
Since the party’s inception, it’s placed its electoral profitability at the service of the winning party in power, becoming a key to passing or blocking reforms.
The post Mexican Government Rejects Accusations of Interference in US through Consulates appeared first on Mexico Solidarity Media.
From Mexico Solidarity Media via This RSS Feed.
Caracas (OrinocoTribune.com)—Venezuelan Acting President Delcy Rodríguez has officially received the insignia of commander-in-chief of the Bolivarian National Armed Force (FANB), during a solemn ceremony at the Bolivarian Military University’s Courtyard of Honor in Caracas.
Accompanied by Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino, National Assembly President Jorge Rodríguez, and Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello, the acting president was honored by military authorities this Wednesday, January 28.
Cabello opened the ceremony, stating that Venezuela faces a complex situation following the kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores by the US empire. “Our loyalty to the National Constitution and its acting president is absolute,” he stated, “because we understand that defending her administration is defending the continuity of the government and the integrity of the Venezuelan people.”
Minister Padrino reaffirmed the FANB’s support for Rodríguez, awarding her symbolic military insignia, including the Baton of Command and a replica of the sword of the Liberator Simón Bolívar. He emphasized that the FANB will act in accordance with the Constitution and the most recent interpretation by the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ), confirming that the high military command and the entire army remain under her leadership.
In an earlier announcement on social media, the defense minister highlighted the legitimacy of the acting president—both in the origin of her position and in constitutional practice—and ratified the full support of the military institution in the defense of the country, the preservation of peace, and the facilitation of reconciliation and democratic processes.
The ceremony featured 3,200 soldiers from the FANB’s five components—the Bolivarian Army, Navy, Air Force, National Guard, and Militia—deployed across Venezuela’s eight strategic regions of comprehensive defense. In military formation, the troops swore to continue the ideals of Simón Bolívar, revived by Hugo Chávez, and linked to the leadership of Nicolás Maduro. Analysts have noted that the act demonstrates the monolithic unity of all state institutions and the constitutionally elected Chavista leadership.
“Our Liberator Father Bolívar, the man of difficulties, was known not only for his giant and immense victories, but also for his defeats, for his countless defeats and misfortunes,” Rodríguez recalled, adding: “I ask you that the same spirit of the Liberator, the greatest in the universe, may take hold of you to open the new paths that we must take today to defend the homeland.”
She stated that it is up to the military youth to guarantee the splendid future of a free homeland, explaining that she comes “with the strength of our history and with the strength of the power of the Venezuelan people.”
National Office for Cyber Defense
During the ceremony, Rodríguez announced the creation of the National Office for Cyber Defense and Security of Venezuela, which will be attached to the Council of Vice Presidents.
The office will be headed by the Minister of Science and Technology, Gabriela Jiménez. Rodríguez asked the nation’s scientists and technology experts to unite with the Military Scientific Council to apply their capabilities toward the defense of Venezuelan cyberspace, less than a month the atrocious military attack by the US empire that violated Venezuela’s sovereignty.
Special for Orinoco Tribune by staff
OT/JRE/AU
From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.
The acting president of Venezuela, Delcy Rodríguez, has confirmed that respectful and courteous communication channels have been established with the government of the US empire.
“I reaffirm what President Donald Trump has said,” she stated this Tuesday, January 27, “that we have established respectful and courteous communication channels, both with the president of the US and with Secretary Marco Rubio, with whom we are establishing a working agenda.”
During the inauguration of the nephrology service at the University Hospital of Caracas, Rodríguez highlighted the Chavista government’s willingness to resolve differences with the US administration through political and diplomatic channels under conditions of mutual respect.
She announced that she successfully secured the unfreezing of Venezuela’s sovereign resources, which will allow for significant investment in hospital equipment—including items purchased from the US entity and other countries—as well as equipment for the nation’s electricity and gas industries.
Analysts have noted that the announcement by the Venezuelan leader likely refers to state funds frozen in international banking institutions since 2019. Under the failed US-led Guaidó regime change attempt, billions of dollars were illegally frozen, alongside the seizure of 31 tons of gold by the Bank of England.
Fund allocation and social protection
Rodríguez reported that the resources will be directed into two existing funds. The first is dedicated to addressing social needs, including worker income, health, education, food, and general social protection. The second sovereign fund will address public services and infrastructure, including electricity, water, and roads.
Additionally, the acting president reiterated her previous announcement regarding the creation of a public digital platform. This tool will allow any citizen to log in and view active projects, as well as the reported income resulting from the unfreezing of Venezuela’s resources.
China Reaffirms Solidarity with Venezuela and Cuba Against US Aggression, Upholds Sovereignty
She also condemned the ongoing disinformation campaigns by transnational mainstream media corporations, asserting that the truth about Venezuela prevails over defamation, and that the stability and peace of the country will always remain prioritized.
Finally, Rodríguez highlighted the importance of diplomatic dialogue to resolve controversies on sensitive issues, as well as “other less sensitive issues, but which should be on the agenda of what should be respectful relations within the framework of the international community between sovereign and independent countries.”
(Alba Ciudad) with Orinoco Tribune content
Translation: Orinoco Tribune
OT/JRE/AU
From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.
By Khaled Barakat – Jan 27, 2026
The convening of the conference of the Masar Badil, the Palestinian Alternative Revolutionary Path Movement, in March 2026 in the city of São Paulo, Brazil will not be a routine organizational event. Rather, it represents a concentrated expression of a deeper political transformation the movement has undergone over the past five years, alongside a parallel shift in the position of the Palestinian shatat within the equation of struggle against the Zionist project. What is taking place today cannot be read as a mere accumulation of activities, but as a qualitative advance of a revolutionary condition that has become a genuine source of disturbance to the Zionist enemy and its allies.
Within a relatively short period of time, the Alternative Revolutionary Path has succeeded in moving from a nascent framework to an international political actor, by building organizational and popular presence in North America and Europe, and by leading a series of conferences and popular mobilizations that have restored the centrality of Palestinian international action in the diaspora. This trajectory has broken the constraints imposed by the Madrid–Oslo phase, during which the diaspora was stripped of its role and relations with the world were confined to official channels and complicit regimes, at the expense of the natural relationship with peoples and liberation movements.
In this context, the organization of the “Week of Return and Liberation” in Brussels in 2022, along with the mass demonstrations that accompanied it in several European capitals, marked an important station in the movement’s development. Thousands of demonstrators, Palestinians, Arabs, and internationalists, took to the streets carrying images of resistance martyrs and symbols of the prisoner movement, chanting for the “Jenin Battalion” and the “Lions’ Den,” in scenes that went beyond the logic of “humanitarian solidarity” toward clear political participation. These mobilizations were organized with the endorsement of one hundred parties and movements. The failure of Zionist entity ambassadors to suppress or defame them indicated a real shift in the balance of action within the arenas of the diaspora.
The movement and its supporters also succeeded in organizing a massive popular march on October 6, 2024, in the heart of the Spanish capital Madrid, on the margins of its general conference. This march reaffirmed a clear position in support of the resistance in the Gaza Strip, despite attempts by the Zionist entity to cancel the march and criminalize the Alternative Revolutionary Path. From within this revolutionary orientation, the Tariq al-Tahrir network emerged as the movement’s youth and student arm.
In my view, the significance of this advance lies in the clarity of the political line adopted by the movement. The Alternative Revolutionary Path does not engage in linguistic maneuvering, nor does it hide behind ambiguous slogans. Rather, it declares an explicit position rejecting the “two-state solution” as a liquidationist project, and restores centrality to the goal of liberating Palestine from the river to the sea, as a unifying framework for national and social struggle. It is precisely this clarity that has made the movement a direct target of repression and criminalization, including attempts to place its organizations on so-called “terrorist lists.”
Yet this frenzied attack has exposed the depth of the anxiety provoked by the movement. Organizations such as the Samidoun Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network, the Alkarama Palestinian Women’s Movement, the Tariq al-Tahrir Network, and other mass frameworks affiliated with the Alternative Revolutionary Path have not been targeted because they are weak, but because they represent a genuine nucleus of an international popular base that transcends the logic of non-governmental organizations. They reconnect the diaspora with the resistance in Palestine, particularly with the prisoners’ movement and the refugee camps and the environments of resistance in the occupied West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
In this context, the movement also advances a necessary critical approach to the experience of the boycott movement, recognizing it as an important tool that must not be separated from the right of return and the struggles of refugees, prisoners, and resistance, nor transformed into a substitute for a revolutionary project of change. Boycott, without a clear liberatory political horizon, risks being emptied of its content and absorbed into sanitized liberal frameworks.
The convening of the São Paulo conference carries an additional significance that goes beyond the Palestinian dimension. It comes from Latin America, a continent where US imperialism continues to plunder the wealth and subjugate the peoples of the region, where colonial memory remains alive, and where popular struggles still see Palestine as a mirror of their own battles. It affirms that the world is wider than the imperial center, and that building an international popular base passes through Asia, Africa, and South America, just as it passes through the very heart of the colonial states themselves.
In sum, what the Alternative Revolutionary Path puts forward is not a ready-made formula for liberation, but a restoration of fundamental truths that were deliberately obscured: there is no liberation without organization, no resistance without the masses, and no confrontation with the Zionist movement without shattering the illusions of settlement produced by the Oslo era. From this standpoint, the March 2026 conference marks the declaration of entry into a new phase of open political confrontation, in light of the results of the ongoing genocidal war in occupied Palestine. This revolutionary momentum, led by Palestinian and international forces at the vanguard, is pressing forward with determination to once again transform exile and diaspora from a space of solidarity into a space of confrontation.
From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.
Caracas, January 29, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – US Secretary of State Marco Rubio defended the Trump administration’s January 3 attack on Venezuela and kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro during a Senate hearing on Wednesday.
“[Having Maduro in power] was an enormous strategic risk for the United States,“ Rubio said in his testimony to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. “It was an untenable situation, and it had to be addressed.”
The Trump official claimed that the military operation aimed to “aid law enforcement” and did not constitute an act of war. He likewise emphasized the White House’s concern about Venezuela allegedly being a “base of operations” for US geopolitical rivals Iran, Russia, and China.
Rubio faced criticism from multiple senators, with Rand Paul arguing that the White House would consider a similar attack directed against the US as an act of war. Despite widespread criticism from Democrats and a handful of Republicans, efforts to pass War Powers resolutions have been narrowly defeated in both the Senate and the House of Representatives.
Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores pleaded not guilty to charges including drug trafficking conspiracy in a New York federal court on January 5. US officials have never presented evidence tying high-ranking Venezuelan leaders to narcotics activities, and specialized agencies have consistently found the Caribbean nation to play a marginal role in global drug trafficking.
The Venezuelan government, led by Acting President Delcy Rodríguez, has repeatedly denounced the US attack and demanded the release of Maduro and Flores. At the same time, Rodríguez and other officials have advocated for renewed diplomatic engagement to settle “differences” with Washington.
The January 3 strikes, which killed 100 people, have drawn widespread condemnation in Latin America and beyond. A recent Progressive International summit in Colombia called for a joint regional response against US aggression.
During Wednesday’s hearing, Rubio reiterated the US government’s plans to control the Venezuelan oil sector and impose conditions on the acting Rodríguez administration. He added that the White House is seeking stability in the South American country ahead of a “democratic transition.”
Rubio additionally confirmed that Washington is administering Venezuelan oil sales, with proceeds deposited in US-controlled bank accounts in Qatar before a portion is rerouted to Caracas. He added that at some point the funds will run through US Treasury accounts.
Democratic senators questioned the legality and transparency of the present arrangement. The Secretary of State further claimed that Caracas would need to submit a “budget request” before accessing its funds.
The initial deal reportedly comprised some 50 million barrels of oil, worth around $2 billion, that had accumulated due to a US naval blockade of Venezuelan exports. After a reported $300 million were turned over to Venezuelan private banks last week, the Venezuelan Central Bank announced that a further $200 million will be made available in early February.
Venezuelan banks are offering the foreign currency in auction to customers, with officials vowing priority for imports in the food and healthcare sectors.
According to Reuters, the US Treasury Department is preparing a general license to allow select corporations to engage in oil dealings with Caracas. Since 2017, the Venezuelan oil industry has been under wide-reaching unilateral coercive measures, including financial sanctions, an export embargo, and secondary sanctions.
In his address, Rubio went on to state that Venezuelan authorities “deserve credit for eradicating Chávez-era restrictions on private investment” in the oil industry, in reference to a recent overhaul of the country’s 2001 Hydrocarbons preliminarily approved last week. He added that a portion of oil revenues will be used for imports from US manufacturers.
On Tuesday, Acting President Rodríguez announced during a televised broadcast that Venezuela was importing medical equipment from the US using “unblocked funds.”
The Venezuelan leader emphasized the importance of relations based on mutual respect with the US and rejected claims that her government is subject to dictates from foreign actors. She affirmed that there are open “communication channels” with the Trump administration and collaboration with Rubio on a “working agenda.”
The acting authorities in Caracas have sought to promote a significant rebound of crude production by offering expanded benefits to private investors as part of the reform bill. Expected to be finally approved in the coming weeks, the new law abrogates provisions introduced under former President Hugo Chávez to ensure majority state control over the oil sector in favor of flexible arrangements granting substantial autonomy to corporate partners.
The post Rubio Defends US Military Operation, Praises Venezuela Oil Reform appeared first on Venezuelanalysis.
From Venezuelanalysis via This RSS Feed.
Lebanese journalist and imam Sheikh Ali Noureddine was killed on Monday in a targeted Zionist drone strike in Sour (Tyre). With Noureddine’s killing, the number of media workers killed by the Israeli occupation in Lebanon has risen to 20.
An Israeli drone strike hit a vehicle in a crowded commercial area of Sour yesterday afternoon, killing Noureddine and wounding two others. The attack marked another violation of the November 2024 ceasefire between Lebanon and the Israeli occupation.
Hezbollah Media Relations condemned the assassination in a statement, describing it as a “war crime” and part of a long series of “brutal crimes against journalists, civilians, and humanity as a whole.” The statement called on journalists, media institutions, unions, and political and intellectual figures to escalate action in local, Arab, and international forums, particularly legal and human rights channels to “curb this Zionist savagery.”
‘Israel’ Attacks Press in Lebanon, Al Mayadeen Mourns Two Colleagues
Separately, the Lebanese Foreign Ministry has once again submitted a complaint to the UN over continued Israeli violations of Lebanese sovereignty. The communique included three detailed tables listing daily Israeli violations during October, November, and December of last year, amounting to over 2,000 breaches (542, 691, and 803 respectively).
Last July, Noureddine took to social media to publicly criticize the Lebanese ruling class for its inaction in face of daily Israeli airstrikes.
Beyond his media career, Noureddine was a prominent religious figure in the South. He previously worked as an anchor and program host on Al-Manar TV and also served as the imam of the Al-Housh town mosque in Tyre.
From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.
By Craig Murray – Jan 26, 2026
I have now been in Caracas for 48 hours and the contrast between what I have seen, and what I had read in the mainstream media, could not be more stark.
I drove right through Caracas, from the airport through the city centre and up to posh Las Mercedes. The next morning I walked all through and weaved my way within the working class district of San Agustin. I joined in the “Afrodescendants festival”, and spent hours mingling with the people. I was made extremely welcome and invited into many homes – this from a district they tell you is extremely dangerous.
I must admit I had great fun at this bit.
After this I continued on for miles walking through the residential area and through the heart of the city centre, including Bolivar Square and the National Assembly.
In all of this I have not seen one single checkpoint, whether police or military. I have seen almost no guns; fewer than you would see on a similar tour taking in Whitehall. I have not been stopped once, whether on foot or in a car. I have seen absolutely zero sign of “Chavista militia” whether in poor, wealthy or central areas. I drove extensively round the opposition strongholds of Las Mercedes and Altamira and quite literally saw not a single armed policemen, not one militia man and not one soldier. People were out and about quite happily and normally. There was no feeling of repression whatsoever.
Again, nobody stopped me or asked who I am or why I was taking pictures. I did ask the Venezuelan authorities whether I needed a permit to take photos and publish articles, and their reply was a puzzled “why would you?”
The military checkpoints to maintain control, the roving gangs of Chavista armed groups, all the media descriptions of Caracas today are entirely a figment of CIA and Machado propaganda, simply regurgitated by a complicit billionaire and state media.
Do you know what else do not exist? The famous “shortages.” The only thing in short supply is shortage. There is a shortage of shortage. There is no shortage of anything in Venezuela.
A few weeks ago I saw on Twitter a photo of a supermarket in Caracas which somebody had put up to demonstrate that the shelves are extremely well stocked. It received hundreds of replies, either claiming it was a fake, or that it was an elite supermarket for the wealthy and that the shops for the majority were empty.
So I made a point, in working-class districts, of going into the neighbourhood, front room stores where ordinary people do their shopping. They were all very well stocked. There were no empty places on shelves. I also went round outdoor and covered markets, including an improbably huge one with over a hundred stalls catering solely for children’s birthday parties!
Everyone was quite happy to let me photograph anything I wanted. It is not just groceries. Hardware stores, opticians, clothes and shoe shops, electronic goods, auto parts. Everything is freely available.

There is a lack of physical currency. Sanctions have limited the Venezuelan government’s access to secure printing. To get round this, everybody does secure payment with their phones via QR code using the Venezuelan Central Bank’s own ingenious app. This is incredibly well established – even the most basic street vendors have their QR code displayed and get their payments this way. Can you spot the QR codes on these street stalls?


To get a Venezuelan phone and sim card for the internet I went to a mall which specialises in phones. It was extraordinary. Four storeys of little phone and computer shops, all packed with goods, organised in three concentric circles of tiered balconies. This photo is just the inner circle. I picked up a phone, sim card, lapel microphones, power bank, multi-system extension lead and ethernet to USB adapter, all in the first little store I entered.

Registering the sim was quick and simple. There is good 4G everywhere I have been in Caracas, and some spots of 5G.
“Relaxed” is a word I would use for Venezuelans. You could forgive paranoia, the country having been bombed by the Americans just three weeks ago and many people killed. You might expect hostility to a rather strange old gringo wandering around inexplicably snapping random things. But I have experienced no sense of hostility at all, from people or officials.
The African festival was instructive. A community event and not a political rally, there were nevertheless numerous spontaneous shouts and chants for Maduro. The Catholic priest giving the blessing at the festivities suddenly started talking of the genocide in Gaza and everybody prayed for Palestine. Community and cultural figures continually referenced socialism.
This is the natural environment here. None of it is forced. Chavez empowered the downtrodden and improved their lives in a spectacular manner, for which there are few parallels. The result is genuine popular enthusiasm and a level of public working-class engagement with political thought that it is impossible to compare to the UK today. It is the antithesis of the hollowed out culture that has spawned Reform.
I am very wary of Western journalists who parachute into a country and become instant experts. Although the stark contradiction between actual Caracas and Western-media Caracas is so extreme that I can bring it to you immediately.
Pretty well everything that I have read by Western journalists which can be immediately checked – checkpoints, armed political gangs, climate of fear, shortages of food and goods – turns out to be an absolute lie. I did not know this before I came. Possibly neither did you. We both do now.
I had lived for years in Nigeria and Uzbekistan under real dictatorships and I know what they feel like. I can tell sullen compliance from real engagement. I can tell spontaneous from programmed political expression. This is no dictatorship.
I am, so far as I can judge, the only Western journalist in Venezuela now. The idea that you should actually see for yourself what is happening, rather than reproduce what the Western governments and their agents tell you is happening, appears utterly out of fashion with our mainstream media. I am sure this is deliberate.
When I was in Lebanon a year ago, the mainstream media were entirely absent as Israel devastated Dahiya, the Bekaa Valley, and Southern Lebanon, because it was a narrative they did not want to report.
Disgracefully, the only time the BBC entered Southern Lebanon was from the Israeli side, embedded with the IDF.
The BBC, Guardian or New York Times simply will not send a correspondent to Caracas because the reality is so starkly different from the official narrative.
One narrative which the Western powers are desperate to have you believe is that Acting President Delcy Rodríguez betrayed Maduro and facilitated his capture. That is not what Maduro believes. It is not what his party believes, and I have been unable to find the slightest indication that anybody believes this in Venezuela.
The security services house journal, the Guardian, published about their fifth article making this claim, and flagged it as front-page lead and a major scoop. Yet all of the sources for the Guardian story are still the same US government sources, or Machado supporters from the wealthy Miami community of exiled capitalist parasites.
What is interesting is why the security services wish you to believe that Delcy Rodríguez and her brother Jorge, Speaker of the National Assembly, are agents for the USA. Opposition to US Imperialism has defined their entire lives since their father was tortured to death at the behest of the CIA when they were infants. They are both vocal in their continuing support for the Bolivarian Revolution and personally for Maduro.
The obvious American motive is to split and weaken the ruling party in Caracas and undermine the government of Venezuela. That was my reading. But it has also been suggested to me that Trump is pushing heavily the line that Rodríguez is pro-American in order both to claim victory, and to justify his lack of support for Machado. Rubio and many like him are keen to see Machado installed, but Trump’s assessment that she does not have the support to run the country seems from here entirely correct.
A variation on this that has also been suggested to me is that Trump wants to portray Rodríguez as pro-American to reassure American oil companies it is safe to invest (though exactly why he wants that is something of a mystery).
Meanwhile of course the USA seizes, steals and sells Venezuelan oil with no justification at all in international law. The proceeds are kept in Qatar under Trump’s personal control and are building up a huge slush fund he can use to bypass Congress. For those with long memories, it is like Iran/Contra on a massively inflated scale.
I am trying to get established in Venezuela to report to you and dive much deeper into the truth from Venezuela. I am afraid I am going to say it takes money. I am looking to hire a local cinematographer so we can start to produce videos. The first may be on what happened the night of the murderous US bombings and kidnap.
I did not want to crowdfund until I was sure it was viable to produce worthwhile content for you. The expenses of getting and living here, and building the required team, to produce good work do add up. I was very proud of the content we produced from Lebanon, but ultimately disappointed that we could not crowdfund sufficiently to sustain permanent independent reporting from there.
So we now have a Venezuela reporting crowdfunder. I have simply edited the Lebanese GoFundMe crowdfunder, because that took many weeks to be approved and I don’t want to go through all that again. So its starting baseline is the £35,000 we raised and spent in Lebanon.
I do very much appreciate that I have been simultaneously crowdfunding to fight the UK government in the Scottish courts over the proscription of Palestine Action. We fight forces that have unlimited funds. We can only succeed if we spread the load. 98% of those who read my articles never contribute financially. This would be a good moment to change that. It is just the simple baseline subscriptions to my blog that have got me to Venezuela, and that remains the foundation for all my work.
Anybody is welcome to republish and reuse, including in translation.
Because some people wish an alternative to PayPal, I have set up new methods of subscription payment including a Patreon account and a Substack account if you wish to subscribe that way. The content will be the same as you get on this blog. Substack has the advantage of overcoming social media suppression by emailing you direct every time I post. You can if you wish subscribe free to Substack and use the email notifications as a trigger to come for this blog and read the articles for free. I am determined to maintain free access for those who cannot afford a subscription.
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.










