Venezuela's Claim over the Essequibo Region and the Ensuing Referendum on Sovereignty
The age-old spat between Venezuela and Guyana over the Essequibo territory, spanning 159,500 square kilometers, has reemerged front and center. The recent events are marked by an unusual tack, as the Venezuela government called for a referendum to bolster its century-long claim and rally the nation.
In the realm of border disputes, this move by Venezuela has shaken the norms established by diplomatic agreement. Typically, such disputes have been addressed through private consultations before taking the matter public. This instance, however, arose out of national unity and determination in a time when the issue has been escalated to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) by Guyana without Venezuela's approval.
Two dimensions of sovereignty arise proudly in this tussle. On one side lies the territorial rights of a nation-state and on the other, the right of the people to self-determination – both paramount expressions of power and freedom.
Predictably, the camp sending Venezuela tough love for the past 25 years supports Guyana. To them, this heated argument presents yet another opportunity to unseat Chavismo, a regional and global thorn in their side.
The December 3 referendum, with a reported 10.5 million voters, highlights the contrast between the struggling Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and the still-dominant U.S., EU, NATO, and the intricate web of corporations these entities represent. The escalating clash, rooted in sovereignty, continues to ripple.
To solidify its claim, Venezuela under Maduro invoked sovereignty as a means of controlling the territory while appealing to the popular will. Such an initiative amplifies the other facet of this principle: the people's right to decide their own destiny.
Territorial sovereignty as an obstacle
In this clash, the divide between the Collective West and the peripheral nations could not be starker. The omnipotent West argues that these territorial struggles are obsolete. Ironically, these same countries are hesitant to relinquish any land they've gained through aggressive expansion or colonialism.
Capitalist imperial forces resist the exercise of territorial sovereignty because it stands in the way of their corporations, the true occupation forces. When it comes to territorial disputes, they tend to favor the nation with a government that ensures maximum potential for looting natural resources or strategic advantages.
In this scenario, that nation is Guyana, thanks to the vast offshore oil reserves discovered beyond the Atlantic facade of Venezuela and within the Essequibo territory Guyana assertively occupies. Since 2015, the US-based ExxonMobil has carried out illicit exploration in these waters, disregarding the instructions of the 1966 Geneva Agreement that forbade disposal of resources from disputed areas until resolution.
The profound relationship between ExxonMobil and Guyana is no conspiracy theory. In "The Intercept," Amy Westervelt plainly states, "Guyana is about to become Exxon's top oil producer," and questions the boundary between the powerful company and the Guyanese government.
The U.S.'s swift criticism of the Venezuelan referendum comes as no surprise. It labeled the referendum as a provocation and intimidation, and, in response, flexed its muscles with joint military maneuvers with the afflicted Guyanese army. It's no secret that the U.S. military wouldn't risk such endeavors for the sake of defending Guyana's sovereignty, but they would gladly do so to safeguard ExxonMobil's interests.
The subservient government of Guyana, bent on the northern vassalage, has leveraged its friendship with the U.S. to threaten Venezuela with hypothetical actions by the Southern Command, the meddling spearhead of the Latin American region.
Against the popular vote
The criminalization of the referendum exposes another facet of the northern powers' stance on sovereignty. These countries, who have slapped Venezuela with the "dictatorship" label for years and insisted on following their own election rules, characterize our referendum as an act of aggression.
Their constant efforts to discredit the Bolivarian Revolution and label it authoritarian are not enough for them. They fear that empowering participatory and proactive practices in the Global South could inspire the same in their own territories.
Over the course of the past 25 years, Venezuela has held seven national referendums, most concerning changes in the constitution. The existing model of domination will not accept these democratic practices and requires major decisions to be made by political, economic, and social elites without appealing to assembly democracy. This, they believe, might hinder the corporatocracy's plans.
The power of narrative
Imperial powers hold a potent weapon: mainstream media and the mechanics of social media, capable of imposing their narratives on significant sectors of the public. This resource allows U.S. leaders to portray Maduro, always described as a tyrant, as having annexed territory belonging to Guyana.
This narrative is far from reality. By carefully considering the results of the popular consultation, Venezuela does not annex. Instead, the territory it claims has been part of the country for over a century, and it possesses historical rights to assert sovereignty.
Ultimately, the triggering event of the current binational crisis lies in the oil concessions granted in undelimited waters – the sole responsibility of the Guyanese government and ExxonMobil. Meanwhile, the referendum, the approval of Essequibo's law, and the distribution of a new map are lifted up as acts of war deserving military response.
Clodovaldo Hernández, a journalist and political analyst, wrote the article in question. His views do not necessarily reflect those of the Venezuelanalysis editorial staff.
- In the escalating clash between Venezuela and Guyana over the Essequibo territory, the Venezuelan government has asserted its sovereignty by calling for a referendum to bolster its century-long claim, drawing contrasts between the two nations.
- Amidst the general news about the territorial dispute, the Venezuelan government under Maduro has invoked sovereignty as a means to control the territory and appeal to the popular will, highlighting the people's right to decide their own destiny.
- The industrial interest in the oil-and-gas resources beneath the Essequibo territory has become apparent, with US-based ExxonMobil entering into illicit exploration in disputed areas without regard for established agreements.
- Finance and energy policies of the involved countries have played a significant role in this conflict, with the US flexing its military muscles to protect ExxonMobil's interests rather than Guyana's sovereignty.
- Politics and policy-and-legislation have come under scrutiny, as the US has labeled the Venezuelan referendum as a provocation and intimidation, while simultaneously criticizing Venezuela for annexation, despite historical evidence claiming otherwise.
- The narrative surrounding this conflict has been influenced by mainstream media and social media, with the US portraying Maduro as annexing territory from Guyana, distorting the reality of the long-standing territorial dispute over the Essequibo region.
