Dear Editor,
The oil in Guyana belongs to the people of Guyana. It does not belong to the United States, to ExxonMobil, or to any group of elected officials acting beyond their constitutional trust.
On December 17, 2019, then U.S. President Donald Trump claimed that Venezuela had taken what he described as “our oil,” stating:
“They took all of our energy rights. They took all of our oil not that long ago. And we want it back.”
Before this, he linked this claim to allegations of drug trafficking and criminal activity as justification for escalated U.S. action against Venezuela. This is classical smokescreen PR, tell them one thing, but do it for another reason.
And the Government of Guyana repeated these exact reasons as recent as President Ali on January 3, 2026. It is like they are reading the same playbook or being coached on what to say.
That framing is legally false. Under international law, natural resources belong to the sovereign state and its people. No foreign power acquires ownership through sanctions, corporate contracts, or political alignment.
Guyana should take note. When Guyana aligns itself uncritically with U.S. geopolitical positions in Latin America, particularly against regional neighbours, it exposes itself to the same logic. If Venezuelan oil can be called “U.S. oil,” then Guyana’s is already US oil. Guyana’s decision to grant extraordinary control over its petroleum sector to ExxonMobil, a corporation deeply intertwined with U.S. strategic and economic interests, compounds this risk. Effective control has been transferred in ways that weaken Guyana’s bargaining power and regional independence.
Guyana occupies a uniquely vulnerable position as the only English-speaking country in South America. That position requires restraint, regional balance, and respect for Caribbean and Latin American solidarity, not alignment that places Guyana at the front line of external power struggles.
Guyana’s oil belongs to the people of Guyana. The State holds it in trust. No foreign government, corporation, or temporary administration has the authority to redefine that fact.
History shows that when sovereignty over resources is diluted in language, it is soon challenged in practice.