logo
Venezuela Is Holding an Election. In Another Country's Land.

Venezuela Is Holding an Election. In Another Country's Land.

New York Times25-05-2025
On Sunday, Venezuela plans to hold an election for governor and legislators to represent Essequibo — a sparsely populated, oil-rich territory.
But there's one problem. Essequibo is internationally recognized as part of neighboring Guyana, not Venezuela.
Most countries and the 125,000 people who live in Essequibo all agree: It belongs to Guyana, a country of about 800,000, not Venezuela, a nation of roughly 28 million.
In staging legislative and regional elections on Sunday, including in Essequibo, Venezuela's autocratic president, Nicolás Maduro, analysts say, is seeking to legitimize his rule abroad and also within his deeply dissatisfied nation, where the military's loyalty is reportedly fraying.
Last year Mr. Maduro declared victory in a presidential election but did not provide any evidence to support his claim. Instead, tallies collected by election monitors showed that his opponent had won in a landslide. Many countries, including the United States, did not recognize Mr. Maduro as the winner.
Of particular concern to Venezuela's government, according to analysts, were vote counts the opposition collected from military barracks showing that a large portion of the armed forces voted against Mr. Maduro.
Mr. Maduro is using the vote in Essequibo to stir nationalistic sentiment and build support for his government, said Benigno Alarcón, the director of a research center at Andrés Bello Catholic University in Caracas, which conducts voter surveys.
Claims to the Essequibo region are deeply ingrained among many Venezuelans who believe the land was historically theirs under Spanish colonial rule and do not consider a 19th-century agreement that ceded the area to Guyana as legitimate.
The Essequibo election 'is a way of trying to unify the people and especially the armed forces against a common enemy,' Mr. Alarcón said.
But most people who live in Essequibo speak English, identify culturally as Guyanese and say they want to remain part of Guyana — the only country most have ever known. Even under Spanish rule it was considered a remote outpost. Across Guyana, shops and cars are plastered with stickers proclaiming the country's ownership of Essequibo.
In recent years, Mr. Maduro has ramped up claims to the region, which comprises about two-thirds of Guyana and includes enormous offshore oil blocks where Exxon Mobil is expanding production.
In 2023, Mr. Maduro reignited the long-running dispute by holding a referendum asking voters whether his government should pursue its claim to Essequibo. The vote was seen as an effort to help divert attention from Venezuela's political and economic crises.
The country's electoral authority said that 95 percent of voters had approved of making the claim, but observers said that turnout was actually low.
Now Mr. Maduro is again stoking a geopolitical crisis as a way to shift the domestic conversation, analysts said.
While most Venezuelans favor taking back the Essequibo, Mr. Alarcón said their trust in the government's intentions and capacity to do so was low.
'It is an issue that has been losing connection with the people, because a lot of time has passed,' he said. 'We have been discussing this for 100 years. Many people already feel that this is a very difficult issue to reverse.'
On Election Day, Venezuelans along the border region with Guyana will choose among four candidates for governor, including the governing party's candidate, Neil Villamizar, a Navy admiral. Voters will also select eight legislative representatives from the region.
It is unclear exactly how Venezuela plans to administer elections in a territory governed by a different country, and Venezuela's electoral authority has not provided clear information.
'It doesn't make any sense,' Mr. Alarcón said.
Guyana's national security minister, Robeson Benn, has said that border security was tightened and that the authorities would arrest any Guyanese person supporting the election.
The modern-day dispute over the Essequibo dates back to 1899, when a Paris tribunal determined the internationally recognized border. But many Venezuelans say the decision was null and void, because it involved a secret deal that Venezuela did not participate in.
Longstanding tensions eased under former President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela, who largely abandoned the issue.
But that was before an oil boom turned Guyana, long one of South America's poorest countries, into a global energy powerhouse and made its economy one of the fastest growing in the world.
By contrast, Venezuela, which holds the world's largest oil reserves, was once buoyed by a thriving oil sector. But years of U.S. sanctions, mismanagement and infrastructural decay have left it in ruins. Unlike Mr. Chávez, Mr. Maduro must contend with a collapsed economy and widespread public discontent.
In 2020, the dispute between the two countries over Essequibo was taken up by the United Nations' top court, the International Court of Justice, where it is still pending. This month, the court ordered Venezuela to refrain from electing officials to oversee the area. But Mr. Maduro has rejected the court's jurisdiction over the issue.
In recent months, Guyana has reported several armed attacks against its soldiers along the Venezuelan border and denounced what it called an illegal incursion by a Venezuelan naval vessel into disputed waters where Exxon Mobil is developing a vast offshore oil field.
Venezuela's government has denied those reports and accused the opposition of conspiring with the United States and Guyana to topple the Maduro government.
As tensions mount, Guyana has ramped up military ties with the United States, which has a strong interest in protecting Exxon Mobil's multibillion-dollar investments in Guyana's oil reserves.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said this month at a news conference in Georgetown, Guyana's capital, where he stood alongside Guyanese President Irfaan Ali, that there would be 'consequences' if Venezuela took military action against its neighbor.
'It would be a very bad day for the Venezuelan regime if they were ever to attack Guyana or attack Exxon Mobil,' Mr. Rubio said.
Yet even Venezuela's opposition has seized on the territorial claims. María Corina Machado, the most prominent opposition leader, visited the area by canoe in 2013 to advance Venezuela's claim.
It is possible that Mr. Maduro will try to negotiate some type of agreement with Guyana, said Phil Gunson, an analyst with International Crisis Group who has been based in Venezuela for more than two decades.
'It may be that what Maduro is really trying to do is to harass the Guyanese so much that they eventually decide to buy him off with some portion of the oil revenues or a portion of territory,' he said. 'And maybe Venezuela can then declare victory and the whole thing will calm down.'
In Guyana last Sunday, every boat, vehicle, home, building and fence will be plastered with Guyanese flags said Vilma De Silva, an elected official in Essequibo. Venezuela is holding its election one day before Guyana's Independence Day.
'Our region is high on the alert,' she said 'We're here and we're not giving up any mountain. We're not giving up any tree. We're not giving up any river that belongs to the Essequibo. It's ours.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Congress Moves To Save Gutted F/A-XX 6th Generation Naval Fighter Program
Congress Moves To Save Gutted F/A-XX 6th Generation Naval Fighter Program

Yahoo

time17 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Congress Moves To Save Gutted F/A-XX 6th Generation Naval Fighter Program

The Senate Appropriations Committee has advanced a draft defense spending bill that would reverse the Pentagon's plan to freeze the U.S. Navy's F/A-XX next-generation carrier-based combat jet program. In addition, the legislation includes funding for the U.S. Air Force to continue with the acquisition of E-7 Wedgetail airborne early warning and control aircraft, something the Department of Defense also wants to axe. The version of the 2026 Fiscal Year Defense Appropriations Bill that the Senate Appropriations Committee approved today includes $1.4 billion for F/A-XX and $647 million for E-7. The $1.4 billion figure aligns directly with a call for additional F/A-XX funding that the Navy had reportedly included in its annual Unfunded Priority List (UPL) sent to Congress earlier this month. The UPLs, which all branches of the U.S. armed forces and certain other commands are required to submit each year by law, are intended to outline key funding requests that could not be included in the annual proposed defense budget. However, the current circumstances surrounding F/A-XX are somewhat unusual in that the Navy appears to be in direct conflict with top Pentagon leadership over the fate of the program. The proposed budget for the 2026 Fiscal Year that the Pentagon rolled out in June includes just enough funding to complete initial development work, but not actually procure any of the jets. U.S. military officials have said that this decision was made to avoid competition for resources with the U.S. Air Force's F-47 sixth-generation fighter program amid concerns that the industrial base in the United States cannot handle work on both efforts simultaneously. Since then, in addition to the UPL submission, Navy officials have been outspoken about how important they view the F/A-XX as part of their service's future carrier aviation plans. 'Nothing in the Joint Force projects combat power from the sea as a Carrier Strike Group, which at the heart has a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier (CVN). To maintain this striking power, the CVN must have an air wing that is comprised of the most advanced strike fighters,' Adm. Daryl Caudle, the current nominee to become the next Chief of Naval Operations, wrote in response to a question about F/A-XX ahead of his confirmation hearing last week. 'Therefore, the ability to maintain air superiority against peer competitors will be put at risk if the Navy is unable to field a 6th Generation strike fighter on a relevant timeline. Without a replacement for the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and E/A-18G Growler, the Navy will be forced to retrofit 4th generation aircraft and increase procurement of 5th generation aircraft to attempt to compete with the new 6th generation aircraft that the threat is already flying.' 'The Navy has a validated requirement for carrier-based 6th generation aircraft, and it is critical that we field that capability as quickly as possible to give our warfighters the capabilities they need to win against a myriad of emerging threats,' he added. Even before the Pentagon's budget rollout, there had been growing signs that the F/A-XX program was at best in limbo, in part due to industrial base concerns. Boeing, the prime contractor for the F-47 and a contender for the F/A-XX contract, notably pushed back on that assertion back in June. Northrop Grumman is understood to be the other company in the running for F/A-XX after Lockheed Martin was reportedly eliminated in March. Lockheed Martin is now aggressively pitching a heavily reworked version of the F-35 as the 'Bridging Fighter' at least for the Air Force ahead of the F-47's arrival. A fight has also already been brewing over the E-7 program, but primarily between the Pentagon and Congress, at least in public. Since 2023, the Air Force's plan had been to replace a portion of its aging E-3 Sentry Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) aircraft with Wedgetails. This was also intended to serve as a bridge toward larger ambitions to eventually push a significant part of that mission set to distributed satellite constellations in space. Confirmation of the decision to axe E-7 purchases and acquire additional E-2D Hawkeye airborne early warning and control aircraft, currently flown by the U.S. Navy, to fill the resulting gap first emerged at a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing in June. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, an Alaska Republican, pushed back hard on that idea at the time. 'I have been concerned. We have E-3 capability up north, of course, but we were all counting on the E-7 Wedgetail coming our way. We're kind of limping along up north right now, which is unfortunate. And the budget proposes terminating the program,' she said. 'Again, the E-3 fleet [is] barely operational now, and I understand the intent to shift towards the space-based – you call it the 'air moving target indicators' – but my concern is that you've got a situation where you're not going to be able to use more duct tape to hold things together until you put this system in place. And, so, how we maintain that level of operational readiness and coverage, I'm not sure how you make it.' 'I would file this entire discussion under difficult choices that we have to make,' Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth said during an ensuing exchange with Murkowski. 'But you know, the E-7, in particular, is sort of late, more expensive and 'gold plated,' and so filling the gap, and then shifting to space-based ISR [intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance] is a portion of how we think we can do it best, considering all the challenges.' Hegseth had also previously highlighted the E-7 as an example of a capability that is 'not survivable in the modern battlefield' and had said that it would be better 'to fund existing platforms that are there more robustly and make sure they're modernized.' Since it formally kicked off two years ago, the Air Force's Wedgetail program had already been beset by notable delays and cost growth, issues the Pentagon has also said were major factors in the cancellation decision. Other advocates of the E-7 program, including a significant number of retired senior Air Force officials, have since stepped forward. Earlier this month, 19 retired Air Force generals, including six former Air Force chiefs of staff, signed onto an open letter from the Air & Space Forces Association to Congress 'to express our alarm' at the Wedgetail plan. On July 11, the House Armed Services Committee released a draft of the separate annual defense policy bill, or National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), for the 2026 Fiscal Year, which also included $600 million for the 'continuation of rapid prototyping' of the E-7. At that time, the proposed legislation made no changes regarding the F/A-XX plans, but members of the committee subsequently directed the Air Force and the Navy to provide more details on their respective next-generation fighter plans. A separate draft defense spending bill put forward by the House Appropriations Committee also included $972 million for continued work on F/A-XX. The House and Senate will eventually have to align their respective draft NDAAs and defense appropriation bills before a final vote on either can occur. Funding plans for F/A-XX and E-7 could change again in the course of that process. President Donald Trump will also still need to sign the bills into law. If nothing else, the Senate Appropriations Committee has now given F/A-XX an important vote of support in the face of the Pentagon's plans to gut the program. It has also joined the growing chorus of calls to push ahead with the Air Force's E-7 effort. Contact the author: joe@ Solve the daily Crossword

IMF Approves $2 Billion Disbursement to Argentina as Peso Slides
IMF Approves $2 Billion Disbursement to Argentina as Peso Slides

Bloomberg

time3 hours ago

  • Bloomberg

IMF Approves $2 Billion Disbursement to Argentina as Peso Slides

The International Monetary Fund 's executive board approved a $2 billion disbursement to Argentina Thursday, a key vote of confidence even as the government of Javier Milei missed a key target while the peso posted its worst month in more than a year. The board approved the funds after IMF staff finished the first review of Argentina's $20 billion deal, the Washington-based lender said in a statement Thursday. It brings total disbursements under the program, known as an extended fund facility, to $14 billion. However, the IMF confirmed that Argentina missed a mid-June target for building up its net international reserves at the central bank.

Defense Spending Could Protect Your Investment Portfolio
Defense Spending Could Protect Your Investment Portfolio

Forbes

time3 hours ago

  • Forbes

Defense Spending Could Protect Your Investment Portfolio

The U.S. defense industry is emerging as one of the most resilient sectors for investors. Amid global instability and rising geopolitical tensions, American policymakers are displaying a unique commitment to military strength. The recent passage of President Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill', a sweeping piece of legislation that pushes U.S. defense spending to historic highs, and a newly agreed upon EU – U.S. trade deal underscores this trend. The bill adds $150 billion in new funding to the Department of Defense, bringing total projected spending for the 2026 fiscal year to over $1 trillion. On top of that, the EU has committed to over $600 billion of military equipment procurement in the coming years. The signal to markets is undeniable: defense is a national and global priority. For investors, this presents an opportunity. Massive new capital is now earmarked for shipbuilding, advanced munitions, next-generation aircraft, and a new missile defense system dubbed the 'Golden Dome.' Defense stocks, long considered cyclical or defensive, may now be positioned for long-term structural growth. Interestingly, this surge in spending comes even as U.S. military expenditures, as a share of GDP, sit at multi-decade lows. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), global defense spending has climbed 37% over the past decade, but America's share of that growth has not kept pace with its expanding economy. In short: U.S. defense spending is climbing fast in absolute terms, but relative to our economic size, there's still plenty of runway ahead. TOPSHOT - An US-made MIM-104 Patriot surface-to-air missile is launched during a live fire exercise at the Chiupeng missile base in Pingtung county on August 20, 2024. (Photo by Sam Yeh / AFP) (Photo by SAM YEH/AFP via Getty Images) AFP via Getty Images Ongoing wars in Europe and the Middle East and intensifying tensions in the Indo-Pacific have forced governments across the globe to rethink their defense postures. In Europe, Russia's continued aggression in Ukraine has led to a dramatic increase in defense budgets across NATO member states. The 2% GDP target for defense spending has given way to a 5%+ target for European members, meaning our allies are finally putting their money where their mouth is – although those expenditures are far from guaranteed. For context, in 2024, the U.S. spent roughly $3,000 per citizen on national defense, more than four times what most European nations spent, according to an article from Barron's . In Europe that number needs to rise meaningfully if they're going to hit their NATO commitments. The Middle East is increasingly unstable. U.S. involvement in ongoing conflicts in the region, including efforts to deter Iran's nuclear program and manage the persistent tensions between Israel and Palestine, continues to highlight the need for advanced missile defense systems, precision munitions, and rapid deployment capabilities. The conflict also highlights the expenses associated with war. Every rocket fired comes with a price tag and restocking munitions is expensive, especially when a conflict is hot and countries can't afford to wait for supplies. The conflict in the Middle East is also indirectly expensive in that it introduces significant volatility into global oil markets. Iran, as a key OPEC member, controls the northern side of the Strait of Hormuz, through which roughly 20% of the world's petroleum supply passes. Any disruption here carries both economic and strategic consequences - further justifying elevated defense spending. Meanwhile, tensions in the Indo-Pacific region continue to build. China's assertiveness around Taiwan and the South China Sea places it in direct competition with U.S. naval and diplomatic interests. The need to prepare for a potential conflict in the region has subtly been called to the forefront via Trump's recent focus on shipbuilding and other maritime industries. U.S. naval power is extremely important if we were to see a real conflict develop here, but we need more ships. The U.S. market share in shipbuilding has plummeted to just 0.13% as of 2023, down from 5% in the 1970s, according to the U.S. Naval Institute. In contrast, China, Japan, and South Korea now account for over 90% of global shipbuilding capacity. As a result, the U.S. is more reliant on allies and commercial partnerships than ever before - a vulnerability that further underscores the need for investment. The international dimension of rising defense spending adds a powerful tailwind for U.S. contractors. In 2024, the U.S. Department of State reported that global arms transfers for the U.S. reached nearly $118 billion, and $97 billion of that was funded directly by U.S. allies and partners. American dominance in foreign military sales is accelerating, not just because of technological superiority, but because of interoperability. As Europe, the Middle East, and Asia expand their defense budgets, they are prioritizing systems that integrate seamlessly with U.S. platforms. Whether it's the F-35 fighter jet or the Patriot missile system, American defense tech is becoming the global standard. This shift has economic implications as well. Defense remains one of the few areas where the U.S. still plays a leading role in high-value manufacturing, a strategic lever in our otherwise service-dominated economy. Arms exports give the U.S. a trade advantage, especially as reducing the trade deficit remains a priority for the Trump administration. The recently finalized EU-U.S. trade deal, which lowered blanket tariffs from 30% to 15%, also includes a pledge of $600 billion in EU military procurement. While the real flow of capital will depend on each country's budget realities, demographics, and political might, the rhetoric alone has been enough to push European defense stocks lower. The market is betting the major U.S. defense contractors, commonly referred to as the primes, will ultimately be the benefactors. Between 2020 and 2024, the U.S. accounted for 43% of all global arms exports, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. Key buyers include Saudi Arabia, Japan, Australia, and EU nations - many of which are now aiming for defense spending levels of 3–5% of GDP. For major U.S. firms like Lockheed Martin (LMT), Northrop Grumman (NOC), and RTX Corp. (RTX), this means multibillion-dollar order backlogs and increased income diversification. It also acts as a hedge against domestic budget volatility, reinforcing the fact that U.S. contractors don't need to rely solely on Washington to grow. OGDEN, UT - MARCH 15: A F-35 fighter jet take-offs for a training mission at Hill Air Force Base on March 15, 2017 in Ogden, Utah. Hill is the first Air Force base to get combat ready F-35's. They currently have 17 that might be deployed in the fight against terrorism and ISIS in the near future. (Photo by) Getty Images The Autonomous Future of Defense A growing portion of new defense dollars is being directed not just at traditional weaponry, but at artificial intelligence, autonomy, and next-generation battlefield technology. While tanks and missiles still matter, it's AI, drones, and predictive analytics that will define the next phase of military dominance. Companies like Anduril Industries are at the forefront of this transformation. Their autonomous drone systems, battlefield command software, and AI surveillance tools are redefining how militaries perform in combat environments. The basis for all current and future R&D is that the U.S. military needs technology that is mass-producible and entirely replaceable. Unmanned and easily replaceable aircraft are a no-brainer for potential future conflicts. Meanwhile, Palantir Technologies (PLTR) continues to expand its work with the Department of Defense, building decision-intelligence platforms that help military leaders simulate outcomes and deploy resources more efficiently. These capabilities aren't theoretical -they're already being used in logistics, counterterrorism, and battlefield planning across several branches of the U.S. military. The software-first approach is here to stay. Defensive Cybersecurity Beyond the battlefield, the digital domain is just as critical. Companies like Palo Alto Networks (PANW), Fortinet (FTNT), and CrowdStrike (CRWD) are playing crucial roles behind the scenes, working alongside defense contractors to secure U.S. military networks and infrastructure. Their platforms are already being used to detect foreign intrusions, prevent ransomware attacks, and build cyber resilience across key defense systems. As cyberattacks from nation-state actors continue to escalate, the Pentagon is steadily shifting a greater portion of its IT and cybersecurity budget toward these firms, viewing them as essential partners in modern warfare. Tanks, aircraft, and ships are worthless if you can't secure the digital infrastructure required for operations. This photograph hsow the logo of the US big data analytics software company Palantir Technologies during the World Economic Forum (WEF) annual meeting in Davos, on January 23, 2025. (Photo by Fabrice COFFRINI / AFP) (Photo by FABRICE COFFRINI/AFP via Getty Images) AFP via Getty Images And then there's SpaceX. Its Starlink satellite network has become essential for battlefield communications, notably in Ukraine, and its ability to launch defense communications into low-Earth orbit has made the company indispensable to Pentagon strategy. The militarization of space is no longer a sci-fi concept - it's a live and growing budget category. Taken together, these companies represent a shift from defense as a manufacturing industry to one centered around software, autonomy, and connected systems. Investors looking to position themselves for the next decade of military innovation would be wise to watch not only the legacy names - but also the disruptors. Parting Thoughts Ultimately, investing in the defense sector isn't just about capitalizing on geopolitical unrest - it's about understanding the structural realignment of global priorities. Defense is a central pillar of economic, technological, and industrial strategy. New legislation in the U.S. and international military spending commitments signal a paradigm shift. Multiyear visibility into global defense spending is music to the ears of the legacy contractors. Rising players in autonomous systems, cybersecurity, and satellite communications are building out the next generation of military infrastructure. There's lots to be excited about, and investors looking for durable tailwinds in a shifting global order should take a look across the entire defense spectrum.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store