U.S. President Donald Trump late Tuesday announced what he called a “total and complete blockade” of sanctioned oil tankers entering and leaving Venezuela, a dramatic escalation that lawmakers, legal experts, and anti war advocates described as an act of war carried out without congressional authorization.
In a series of posts on his social media platform, Trump said the blockade would remain in place until Venezuela returns to the United States “all of the Oil, Land, and other Assets that they previously stole from us.” He asserted that Venezuela has been designated a “FOREIGN TERRORIST ORGANIZATION” and framed the action as a response to what he described as theft, terrorism, drug smuggling, and human trafficking.
“Therefore, today, I am ordering A TOTAL AND COMPLETE BLOCKADE OF ALL SANCTIONED OIL TANKERS going into, and out of, Venezuela,” Trump wrote.
The declaration followed a rapid buildup of U.S. military assets in the region. According to the reporting provided, the Trump administration has moved thousands of troops and nearly a dozen warships, including an aircraft carrier, into the Caribbean. Trump underscored that posture in his own language, writing that Venezuela is “completely surrounded by the largest Armada ever assembled in the History of South America,” adding, “It will only get bigger, and the shock to them will be like nothing they have ever seen before.”
Venezuela’s government immediately rejected the announcement. Officials denounced Trump’s comments as a “grotesque threat” and accused the United States of seeking control over the country’s natural resources. President Nicolás Maduro said the U.S. military buildup was aimed at overthrowing his government and seizing Venezuela’s oil wealth.
“Imperialism and the fascist right want to colonize Venezuela to take over its wealth of oil, gas, gold, among other minerals,” Maduro said. “We have sworn absolutely to defend our homeland and in Venezuela peace will triumph.”
The blockade announcement came one week after U.S. authorities seized a sanctioned oil tanker off Venezuela’s coast and indicated that additional interdictions could follow. Reuters described the situation as already resembling an effective embargo, with tankers loaded with millions of barrels of oil remaining in Venezuelan waters rather than risk seizure.
Members of Congress quickly raised alarms over the legality of the move. Rep. Joaquin Castro of Texas, a Democrat leading a war powers resolution to prevent the administration from launching a war against Venezuela without congressional approval, said the action crossed a clear legal line.
“A naval blockade is unquestionably an act of war,” Castro said. “A war that the Congress never authorized and the American people do not want.” Castro noted that a vote on his resolution is scheduled for Thursday and said every House member would be forced to decide whether they support “sending Americans into yet another regime change war.”
The concerns echoed warnings from international law experts. Elena Chachko, an international law scholar at UC Berkeley Law School, said Trump’s asserted blockade represents a significant test of presidential authority. While blockades have historically been treated as instruments of war, she said they are subject to strict conditions.
“There are serious questions on both the domestic law front and international law front,” Chachko said.
Human rights organizations and anti war groups said the administration’s actions reflected a broader pattern of escalation. The U.S. based group CodePink argued that Trump’s demands revealed the underlying objective of the campaign.
“Trump’s assertion that Venezuela must ‘return’ oil, land, and other assets to the United States exposes the true objective,” CodePink said. “Venezuela did not steal anything from the United States. What Trump describes as ‘theft’ is Venezuela’s lawful assertion of sovereignty over its own natural resources and its refusal to allow US corporations to control its economy.” The group added, “A blockade, a terrorist designation, and a military buildup are steps toward war. Congress must act immediately to stop this escalation, and the international community must reject this lawless threat.”
The administration’s move also drew scrutiny for contradicting assurances previously given to lawmakers. Dylan Williams, vice president for government affairs at the Center for International Policy, wrote that the White House had sought to downplay Republican support for a war powers resolution by promising that Trump would seek congressional authorization before initiating hostilities against Venezuela.
“Trump today broke that promise to his own party’s lawmakers by ordering a partial blockade on Venezuelan ships,” Williams wrote. “A blockade, including a partial one, definitively constitutes an act of war. Trump is starting a war against Venezuela without congressional authorization.”
Just last month, Senate Republicans voted down a Venezuela war powers resolution, though two GOP senators, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, joined Democrats in supporting it. Human rights groups have accused the Republican controlled Congress of abdicating its constitutional responsibilities as the administration carries out belligerent actions in international waters, often claiming without evidence that the operations are aimed at combating drug trafficking.
Beyond the legal and political ramifications, Trump’s announcement immediately rippled through global energy markets. Oil prices rose more than 1 percent in Asian trading following the blockade declaration. Brent crude futures climbed to $59.62 a barrel, while U.S. West Texas Intermediate rose to $56.00 a barrel. Market participants cited expectations of reduced Venezuelan exports, even as they waited for clarity on how the blockade would be enforced and whether it would extend beyond sanctioned vessels.
China, identified in the reporting as the largest buyer of Venezuelan crude, accounts for roughly 4 percent of its oil imports from the country, with December shipments averaging more than 600,000 barrels per day. Analysts warned that a prolonged disruption could tighten supply. David Goldwyn, a former State Department energy diplomat, said the loss of Venezuelan exports could push prices significantly higher if not offset by increased OPEC spare capacity.
“I would expect inflation to skyrocket, and massive and immediate migration from Venezuela to neighboring countries,” Goldwyn said.
The blockade also comes amid heightened military activity. According to the Reuters account included in the provided material, Trump’s pressure campaign has involved more than two dozen military strikes on vessels in the Pacific Ocean and Caribbean Sea near Venezuela, resulting in at least 90 deaths. Trump has also said that U.S. land strikes on Venezuela will soon begin. In interviews cited in the reporting, Trump’s chief of staff Susie Wiles said Trump “wants to keep on blowing boats up until Maduro cries uncle.”
Sen. Ruben Gallego of Arizona warned earlier this week that the administration appeared intent on dragging the country into another conflict. “This is the Iraq War 2.0 with a South American flavor to it,” Gallego said. “This is absolutely an effort to get us involved in a war in Venezuela.”
As lawmakers prepare to vote on war powers legislation and global markets react to the threat of disrupted oil supplies, the legal and constitutional questions surrounding Trump’s blockade order remain unresolved. “A naval blockade is unquestionably an act of war,” Castro said. “A war that the Congress never authorized and the American people do not want.”
COMMENTS