featured
Wall Street Prepares to Strip Venezuela’s Wealth // Kyle Kulinsky
Kyle Kulinsky | Trusted Newsmaker
Wall Street Prepares to Strip Venezuela’s Wealth as Regime Change Opens the Door
Within days of political upheaval in Venezuela, some of the most powerful players on Wall Street were already positioning themselves for what they see as a historic opportunity. Hedge funds, asset managers, and consultants began openly discussing plans to travel to Caracas and meet with officials aligned with a prospective new government, with the goal of selling off Venezuelan state assets at bargain prices.
The speed of the response was striking. Even as Venezuela’s political future remained unclear, financial elites were acting as though regime change was already settled. According to reporting cited in the Wall Street Journal, senior figures from the finance, energy, and defense sectors planned a coordinated visit to Venezuela to explore investment opportunities under “new leadership,” despite uncertainty over who actually controls the government.
A Familiar Playbook From the 1990s
Critics argue the strategy mirrors the post-Soviet privatization of Russia in the 1990s, when Western financiers acquired vast public assets for pennies on the dollar. In Venezuela, the targets are clear: oil, minerals, and precious metals. With the country possessing some of the world’s largest proven oil reserves, Wall Street’s interest has long been less about democracy and more about access.
Under Venezuela’s previous system, major energy assets were nationalized, meaning oil revenues formally belonged to the public. The shift now being discussed would reverse that arrangement, transferring control to private investors and multinational corporations. Supporters frame this as “economic reform.” Opponents call it looting disguised as liberalization.
Political Chaos, Financial Certainty
What makes the situation especially volatile is the gap between political reality and financial assumption. At the time these plans were reported, it was still unclear who would lead Venezuela, whether the military would support a new administration, or whether internal conflict might erupt. Yet Wall Street appeared confident enough to act as though outcomes were already decided.
This confidence has fueled accusations that powerful financial interests exert influence far beyond markets, shaping political outcomes rather than merely responding to them. The expectation of rapid privatization suggests that investors anticipate a government willing to prioritize foreign capital over domestic control of resources.
Oil, Minerals, and Strategic Control
Oil remains the central prize, but it is not the only one. Venezuela also holds significant mineral wealth, including precious metals critical to global supply chains. Reports have already circulated of U.S. financial institutions positioning themselves to benefit from refining, extraction, and infrastructure upgrades tied to these resources.
One example frequently cited by critics is the forced sale of Citgo, the U.S.-based subsidiary of Venezuela’s state oil company, to a prominent American billionaire. The deal transferred control of major energy infrastructure away from Venezuelan public ownership and into private hands, reinforcing fears that broader asset seizures could follow.
Drugs as a Pretext
Officials have often justified aggressive actions toward Venezuela by citing drug trafficking. However, data undermines that rationale. Only a small fraction of drugs entering the United States originate from Venezuela, and fentanyl, the primary driver of the overdose crisis, does not meaningfully pass through the country. Critics argue that the drug narrative functions as cover for resource-driven intervention rather than a genuine public safety concern.
Instead of addressing domestic economic pressures, inflation, or healthcare costs, the U.S. government has devoted attention and resources to foreign interventions that appear to benefit a narrow class of investors. The result, critics say, is a transfer of wealth upward and outward, away from both Venezuelan citizens and American taxpayers.
The Cost of Modern Imperial Economics
The rapid financial scramble following Venezuela’s destabilization has been described as a moral and ethical collapse, exposing the underlying logic of modern imperial economics. High-minded rhetoric about human rights and democracy gives way to blunt admissions about oil, profits, and strategic advantage once the opportunity arises.
This pattern is not limited to Venezuela. Private equity’s role in dismantling industries, healthcare systems, and long-standing companies has become a defining feature of the modern economy. Workers lose jobs, communities hollow out, and profits consolidate at the top. Venezuela, critics argue, is simply the latest and most extreme example.
What Comes Next
As Venezuela faces an uncertain future, the speed with which global financial actors have mobilized underscores who stands to gain most from instability. For ordinary Venezuelans, the prospect of mass privatization raises fears of increased poverty and loss of sovereignty over national resources. For Wall Street, it represents a rare chance to acquire strategic assets at minimal cost.
Whether the country descends into prolonged conflict or stabilizes under new leadership, the financial plans already in motion suggest that the economic fallout will be long-lasting. The question is no longer whether Venezuela will change, but who will own what remains when it does.
