US seizes oil tanker off coast of Venezuela

For it to be a blockade runner, there would need to be a blockade.

Are we blockading Venezuela? That would generally be considered an act of war.

Further context: it's owned by a sanctioned Russian oligarch,

> "The ship — known as Adisa in 2022 — is among the vessels controlled by sanctioned Russian oil magnate Viktor Artemov, the Treasury said in a statement[...] The tanker is controlled by Nigeria-based management company Thomarose Global Ventures LTD and owned by a firm linked to Artemov, according to publicly available data."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-we-know-oil-tanker-the-ski...

China doesn’t have the infrastructure or logistics to wage a far from home operation against a similar power country (let alone the USA). They might get there in a decade or two, but right now there isn’t much they can do besides provide material support.

Their whole move to EVs is more about national security as it is about environment. Not having to get into wars about oil because you don’t need so much is it’s own freedom.

This more so, as the two countries "upgraded" their relations to an "all-weather strategic partnership":

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-02/us-venezuela-global-a...

https://english.www.gov.cn/news/202505/10/content_WS681e8bd6... (chinese state media)

I guess this will show what "all-weather" is supposed to mean. It doesn't seem to include any military support and at least others are sceptical with respect to the current situations as well:

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/3335116/china-unlike...

> Interesting that I read elsewhere that most Venezuelan oil goes to China due to the sanctions.

It's possible China has built out its infrastructure in the past 5 years and can process this oil now, but in the 2010s the more common practice was for the Venezuelans to sell the oil to a Chinese intermediary that would transport it on a tanker to the Gulf Coast, where the American refineries capable of processing Venezuelan sour crude are located.

> Would be nice to see them put a carrier group down there to guard their shipments...

This would be a 4D chess move right off the edge of the game board and into a latrine.

China doesn't want to get involved in an oil war. It doesn't want to send its limited blue-water capabilities into America's backyard to get painted. It doesn't want to deal with oil supply chains against America's nuclear-powered fleet. And it doesn't want to risk Trump popping an aneurysm and disabling their ships, an attack to which all retaliation options carry material risks of nuclear escalation (in a way bombing boats on the other side of the world does not), and which would mean trashing China's and the global economy as the trade war turns blockade.

Deescalation would be preferable to escalation no? Personally I'd prefer this cold war we're living through not kick off into global hot war.

Whoever replaces Maduro will still be corrupt. Americans think they are fighting the good fight but it will turn out like Iraq: the spice will flow and the Chinese know it.

Never interrupt your enemy when they are making a mistake.

China wants oil. Wants to pay in Chinese Yuan.

Venezuela has oil. Wants to sell them in Chinese Yuan, because America bad.

America ensures the world's waters stay safe for commerce as long as all countries continue to do business in dollars.

When they don't, America is forced to remind them.

China in the meantime continues to diversify away from oil and doesn't mind taking risks that could cut supply. Venezuela's leadership has, for reasons well understood, fewer options.

America's number one export, as is every global empire's number one export is its currency. It's a gift and a curse.

Saddam's days were numbered when he began selling oil in Euros.

Gaddafi's days were numbered when he tried to sell oil in "gold dinars".

It was spelled out in the recently published National Security Strategy [1]:

   > We want to ensure that the Western Hemisphere remains reasonably stable and well-governed enough to prevent and discourage mass migration to the United States; we want a Hemisphere whose governments cooperate with us against narco-terrorists, cartels, and other transnational criminal organizations; we want a Hemisphere that remains free of hostile foreign incursion or ownership of key assets, and that supports critical supply chains; and we want to ensure our continued access to key strategic locations. In other words, we will assert and enforce a “Trump Corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine.

[1] https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/2025-N...

Because it has oil on it, you can sell oil for money.

Oil. It's always oil.

While seizing oil supplies and using them to corruptly reward cronies of Trump’s is probably part of it, a bigger part of it is just to have a war, both to provide a legal and propaganda cover for domestic repression (a war with Venezuela —due to a completely fictitious invasion by Venezuela—is already part of the pretext for that since Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act on that basis in March) and to provide an electoral rally-around-the-flag effect.

Steal the oil and in the process destabilize the government to force regime?

I suspect it's loaded with drugs rerouted from the speedboats that have been getting BTFO.

Don't worry, a significant portion of us in the US are also utterly confused in regards to whats going on with the federal government.

I suspect they want to gain access to Venezuelan oil reserves to make energy cheaper, reduce prices, and win elections. Or grift off it for personal wealth. Or both.

While I don't think the US has the authority to warrant the sizing of another country's oil tanker, the US may believe they have justification.

Accusation: Venezuela is using Nigeria as a means to launder sanctioned oil.

https://x.com/0x2719/status/1998867882365825299?s=20

> Can someone explain why US sanctions on Iranian oil would have any relevance to Venezuela?

"Brokers in Singapore told The Wall Street Journal that a tanker called the Skipper was the vessel seized off Venezuela early Wednesday. The tanker, formerly called the Adisa, had been sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control for carrying Iranian crude" [1].

[1] https://www.wsj.com/world/americas/u-s-seizes-oil-tanker-off...

Oh, I think I know this one. Venezuela crude is really heavy and dirty, but a lot of refineries, including ones in Texas and I imagine Iran, are designed to mix it with some lighter crude to derive a decent gasoline yield. These refineries only work like this however, and have basically become dependent on dirty crude sources like Venezuela. The USA I think is dealing via Alberta tar sands, but maybe they decided to just steal the oil from Venezuela directly (Trump is unhinged like that).

This is the US navy resorting to gunboat diplomacy.

> Under what authority???

Under U.S. law, if they're smart, anti-piracy and anti-narcotics interdiction. They're not, so they're citing sanctions.

Practically, however, this is sort of the endgame to the spheres-of-influence narrative. China can ram Phillipine fishing boats. Russia can steal children. America can commandeer random shit in the Western hemisphere.

So, despite all the stupid trolling there's an actual answer to this question.

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea authorizes any state to interdict stateless vessels, which this was.

Under Operation Freedom. We're gonna make sure every drop of oil is liberated from Venezuela.

The Epstein Distraction Act.

Non but superior firepower the US is reverting to might makes right for all to see. I can't wait for the response to "China seizes container ship leaving Taiwan loaded with illicit semiconductors to enforce its tariffs and export restrictions on trade with the 'rebelious province' by force".

[flagged]

Hope they don't confuse her boat and blow her up :/

hmmm... "seized" :)

Sirius Star ... on 15 November 2008, becoming the largest ship ever captured by pirates.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MV_Sirius_Star

> Imagine the outrage if the title were instead "China seizes Philippine oil tanker in South China Sea"

China has been sinking Philippine boats in Philippine territorial waters [1].

There are good reasons to be outraged about this. But it's continuing a precedent China and Russia set, presumably assuming the West wouldn't follow.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Reed_Bank_incident

How is that comparable? That seems like a deliberate misrepresentation of the situation.

US actions here almost certainly have the full backing of what they (probably rightfully) consider to be the legitimate Venezuelan government.

I feel like associating piracy with Somalians like you just did is also bordering on "saying vile things about Somalia", presumably only a very small fraction of Somalians are pirates.

Just food for thought.

[flagged]