A Dangerous Miscalculation: Venezuela, Ecuador, and the End of U.S. Hemispheric Dominance

 

A Dangerous Miscalculation: Venezuela, Ecuador, and the End of U.S. Hemispheric Dominance

by Germanico Vaca

What we are witnessing today is not merely a series of reckless political statements or isolated diplomatic incidents. It is the manifestation of a profound strategic failure by the current leadership of the United States—a failure rooted in historical amnesia, intellectual complacency, and a fundamental misunderstanding of how global power has shifted.

The idea that the United States can intimidate, coerce, or militarily pressure Venezuela without catastrophic consequences is not only outdated—it is dangerously delusional. This miscalculation risks triggering systemic geopolitical realignments that could permanently alter the global balance of power.

Venezuela Is Not Iraq, Vietnam, or Libya

Venezuela is not a weak, isolated state. It is one of the most resource-rich territories on Earth, holding the largest proven oil reserves globally, alongside vast deposits of gold, rare earth elements, strategic minerals, and crystalline structures increasingly critical to advanced technologies.

In the 20th century, the United States could intervene in Latin America largely uncontested. That era is over.

Venezuela today exists within a radically transformed geopolitical environment. Russia, China, Iran, and other emerging powers are already economically and strategically invested in its stability. Any attempt to seize Venezuelan assets—whether oil tankers, financial holdings, or territorial leverage—does not occur in a vacuum. It directly challenges the interests of nations that now possess both the capacity and the willingness to respond.

This is not speculation. It is an observable reality.

The Historical Pattern Latin America Recognizes—Even When Washington Does Not

Latin America approaches U.S. military presence with deep skepticism, not because of ideology, but because of lived experience.

Throughout the 20th century, “international agreements,” “security cooperation,” and “temporary military arrangements” repeatedly functioned as instruments of:

• Resource extraction

• Territorial leverage

• Political subordination

From Guatemala to Chile, from Colombia to Ecuador, the pattern is unmistakable. Military presence precedes economic dependency; economic dependency precedes political capture.

South Americans, often dismissed as “emotional” or “anti-American,” are in fact demonstrating superior historical pattern recognition. We have seen this mechanism before, many times.

The Protocol of Rio de Janeiro (1942) stands as a textbook example. Under the guise of international guarantees, Ecuador lost vast territories—shortly followed by foreign access to oil concessions near disputed borders. Similar mechanisms were applied across the region, including Venezuela.

These were not coincidences. They were systems.

Ecuador at the Crossroads

Ecuador now stands at a dangerous inflection point.

The renewed use of the Manta base—ostensibly for temporary military exercises—must be analyzed within this historical and strategic framework. The United States already maintains extensive military infrastructure in Colombia. There is no operational necessity to involve Ecuador unless it serves a broader geopolitical purpose.

That purpose may be proxy positioning.

If conflict escalates, Ecuador risks becoming a perceived launch point, absorbing retaliation while the true decision-makers remain insulated. This is not conjecture; it is a known strategic model. Smaller states are often positioned as buffers, proxies, or sacrificial zones in great-power competition.

The Ecuadorian population has already rejected this path through democratic consultation. Any attempt to bypass that decision risks not only domestic instability but regional backlash.

BRICS Changes Everything

The most critical variable that Washington appears unable—or unwilling—to grasp is the BRICS realignment.

Brazil’s integration into BRICS is not symbolic; it is structural. It reflects a shift away from U.S.-centric financial, military, and diplomatic systems. Venezuela’s potential inclusion would dramatically accelerate this transition.

An attack—direct or indirect—against Venezuela under such conditions would not be a regional dispute. It would be perceived as a declaration of war against an emerging multipolar order.

This is how world wars begin: not with intent, but with arrogance.

The Fragmentation Strategy and Its Limits

For over a century, U.S. strategy in the Western Hemisphere has centered on preventing South American unification. A unified South American bloc would control over 50% of the planet’s strategic natural resources, alongside a massive population and growing technological capacity.

Fragmentation has therefore been essential.

But fragmentation is no longer guaranteed.

Economic pressure, military intimidation, and media narratives are losing effectiveness as alternative financial systems, trade routes, and security partnerships mature. The Monroe Doctrine is no longer enforceable—it is merely invoked.

Argentina and the Weaponization of Debt

Argentina’s situation illustrates the sophistication of modern control mechanisms.

What is often presented as “U.S. assistance” is, in reality, debt entrapment designed to sustain dollar hegemony. The requirement to purchase U.S. securities in exchange for loan “guarantees” does not strengthen Argentina—it strengthens a collapsing monetary system.

Few understand that the Federal Reserve is neither federal nor a reserve. It is a private institution whose power depends on global belief in its legitimacy. As that belief erodes, increasingly coercive financial arrangements become necessary.

This is not economic aid. It is system maintenance.

The Crisis of U.S. Governance

Underlying all of this is a deeper issue: the visible breakdown of U.S. governance.

The constitutional system of checks and balances was designed to distribute power and prevent exactly this kind of unilateral recklessness. That system has been steadily hollowed out over decades. What we see now is the late-stage manifestation of that erosion.

Political figures serve as focal points, not decision-makers. Chaos is not accidental—it is functional. Disorientation facilitates compliance. Fear simplifies populations.

This is not merely about personalities or cognitive decline. It is about structural decay.

A Warning, Not a Threat

Ecuador, Venezuela, and South America are not enemies of the United States. But they are no longer passive territories within an uncontested sphere of influence.

What is at stake is not oil alone, but the architecture of global power itself.

History shows that empires rarely recognize their decline in time to manage it peacefully. The tragedy would be repeating that pattern—this time with nuclear-armed states, integrated global supply chains, and planetary-scale consequences.

This is not a call for confrontation.

It is a call for intelligence, restraint, and historical awareness—qualities that, at this moment, appear dangerously absent.