Dear Editor,
As Guyanese citizens, we have watched the arrival of U.S. warships with a sense of relief, viewing them as a necessary shield against Nicolás Maduro’s aggressive claims to the Essequibo. However, we must look beyond the immediate show of force and question the true motives and potential consequences of this American intervention. What is being sold to us as protection may, in fact, be lighting a fuse on a regional powder keg.
Leading geopolitical analysts, such as Fareed Zakaria, suggest that U.S. policy is driven less by a commitment to defending territorial integrity or democracy, it is less focused on oil and fueled more by a dangerous ideological crusade for regime change spearheaded by Secretary of State Marco Rubio. This “Rubio Doctrine” has a clear, twofold target: Caracas and Havana. The true aim is to sever Venezuela’s oil lifeline to Cuba, delivering a “death blow” to the remnants of the Castro regime —a deeply personal political goal for Rubio, whose parents were part of the Cuban Exodus of the 60’s. This explains why Venezuela is a priority over other global crises; it is a proxy war to dismantle the Cuban-backed security apparatus propping up Maduro.
While the fall of Maduro might seem a welcome outcome, the U.S. strategy to achieve it—through crushing sanctions and a total naval blockade—threatens to create a catastrophe on our border. We must see this not as a holistic solution, but as a direct threat to Guyana’s own security and stability.
The “Failed State” Neighbour: A collapsed Venezuela would not mean the end of our border threats. It would mean the replacement of a government we can engage or challenge at the International Court of Justice with a chaotic patchwork of militias, armed gangs (colectivos), and warlords. This unpredictable, lawless frontier would be far more dangerous and impossible to deter with conventional diplomacy.
The Overwhelming Migrant Wave: Guyana is already hosting tens of thousands of Venezuelans fleeing hardship. A total economic implosion or civil strife could unleash a flood of hundreds of thousands of refugees, crushing our healthcare, education, and social services beyond their breaking point.
Oil and Hegemony, Not Partnership: The U.S. rhetoric of “returning stolen assets” and controlling oil flows reveals a broader ambition: the reclamation of absolute regional dominance. Our protection may be a secondary benefit to
securing energy resources strictly for Washington’s strategic interests, turning Guyana from a sovereign partner into a client state in a new era of colonial-style geopolitics.
We are being drawn into a high-stakes ideological experiment. The question for Guyana is not whether we desire security for the Essequibo—we unequivocally do—but whether this U.S. strategy is designed for our long-term peace or for regime change at any cost.
History, from Iraq to Libya, is clear: toppling a dictator is the easy part. It is the enduring chaos, violence, and humanitarian disaster that follows which we, as the immediate neighbour, will be forced to endure. Guyana must urgently advocate for regional stability and diplomatic solutions, recognizing that a “protected” Guyana is worthless if it borders a burning state. We must not mistake America’s retribution for our salvation.